Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Isnt that 'continue to apply tarifs in breach of WTO regs? As already mentioned here a couple of pages ago  ,, So just Johnsonite right wing press dog whistling to the rabid sheep and distract from Johnsons many many ongoing misdeeds. ... and look at who and where benefits - it aint the UK taxpayer.     Been re-looking at some stuff - and this warrants a fresh look .. and running yourself in circles trying to make sense of it LOL       .. like how so many remainers thought Corbuncle was a good choice .. (not that there was any choice for remainers)
    • It isn't joined up thinking, is it? Sounds a bit desperate to me.   Worse, Johnson told Beth Rigby of Sky that he'll coast through the next election and is making plans for a third term, taking his reign to the mid-2030s. If I were a Tory rebel, I'd be looking to get him out before he can run in another election.   Boris Johnson eyeing up THIRD term that would keep him in power until 'mid-2030s' - Mirror Online WWW.MIRROR.CO.UK Despite two by-election drubbings on the same day, brazen Boris Johnson says he 'thinking actively' about staying much, much longer in Downing Street  
    • Sunday Telegraph reporting that Government looking to apply tariffs on steel imports to the UK.   This is apparently the issue the independent advisor on Ministerial code of conduct quit,  because applying the tarrifs would break international law and agreements signed up to.   Move seen as being popular with brexit voters, particularly those in red wall seats.   I thought Government were in favour of free trade without barriers and wanting businesses to be operating in a profitable way. Surely if the tariffs lead to higher costs, as the cheaper steel is no longer as good an option, it means companies making items out of steel will have to increase price of their goods  therefore they would be less competitive in the UK and abroad ?
    • There are a number of things wrong with the PCN. First as already mentioned there is no parking period mentioned. There has to be a start and an end to the parking period. You were supposed to be there and the permit was available to you. Does the signage cover their T&Cs for 24 hours?  It would have been better had a  photograph been added with the permit included. Could you still do it without including the day and time? This would show that you were entitled to be there.  N Not sure that the driver would be granted a grace period if no permit though that could mean the driver was trespassing and  only the land owner can sue for trespass. But the driver could always put them to strict proof as to the length of stay the car was there. Then there is an argument to say that the car was stopped and the T&Cs were read. After reading them the motorist left but a ticket had already been issued.   The second thing wrong with the PCN is the wording they used does not comply with Schedule 4 s9 [2][f]-the words in brackets are missing. The third thing  is that they are claiming £115 if payment is not received within the stipulated time. That makes the PCN unlawful since the maximum that can be demanded is £100 and that amount should definitely not appear on the Notice to Keeper which is very strict on what can be said.   All that means is that the keeper is not liable for the debt. Only the driver is. So as long as the keeper does not divulge who was driving there is no one Premier can sue.   There is also a new Act coming out called the Private Parking Code of Practice . This is an upgrade on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and allows tickets issued for a Permit or a Blue Badge for instance not being shown at the time of the offence to be cancelled if they did actually have a current Permit or Blue Badge at the time.It is too early to know if Judges will take that into consideration yet bt we may know more once some of the newer cases arrive in Court.
    • its no diff evri lost a parcel.   same process as any lost parcel thread   dx
  • Our picks

VICTORY (AT LAST) AGAINST THE CRA's!!! Oh, how sweet it tastes!


SurlyBonds
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5526 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Well its off to the OFT for me for me then as I requested all of the above and have not recieved any of these details.

I was told that the FSA did not regulate current accounts so only DPA guidelines were followed and that DPA did not cover the information I requested.

No further explanation was given for that.

I may just start to fight harder.

 

Thanks for help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Barclays - Success. Total £3000.

Barclaycard - Success. £2500

Barclays Brother - Success £500ish

Vodafone - Default removal + claim for distress. Settled default removed = £1000 in compensation + £120 court costs paid. :D

-------------------------------------------------

Barclays using fowl play - Here

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well its off to the OFT for me for me then as I requested all of the above and have not recieved any of these details.

I was told that the FSA did not regulate current accounts so only Data Protection Act guidelines were followed and that DPA did not cover the information I requested.

No further explanation was given for that.

I may just start to fight harder.

 

Thanks for help.

 

No, not quite....

 

the FSA requirement is for the retention of data to help prevent money-laundering, etc. and provide an audit trail of the account. You don't actually use the FSA to see the data.

 

The data is requested under the DPA... but it is only there in the first place, because the FSA, and other Acts, says that thay have to keep an audit trail.

 

Hope that clarifes it for you.

  • Confused 1

I'm often a sarcastic SOB and speak my mind (and I don't do PC at all), but I have a laugh as I go. I won't be intimidated, and I don't take prisoners... so live with it, or go get yourself a humour implant :p

 

Copy of Law book from Amazon…£19.95, Refund Request stamp...32p, LBA stamp...also 32p, Court fees...£750.00,

The look on the bank's barrister's face, when they lost the '£25k Mother-of-all unfair charges' cases...(plus his £8k+ of costs)... Priceless!

 

The legal bit: These are my opinions and own view of legislation and process. I accept no liability whatsoever for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any or all of the advice given - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured legal professional.

Saying that, I've used these methods against many of these corporate crooks:evil: and won hands down!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well its off to the OFT for me for me then as I requested all of the above and have not recieved any of these details.

I was told that the FSA did not regulate current accounts so only Data Protection Act guidelines were followed and that Data Protection Act did not cover the information I requested.

No further explanation was given for that.

I may just start to fight harder.

 

Thanks for help.

 

Okay, the section of the Data Protection Act that allows the data subject ALL data rights, not just your financial data:

 

 

PART II

 

 

 

RIGHTS OF DATA SUBJECTS AND OTHERS

 

Right of access to personal data.

7. - (1) Subject to the following provisions of this section and to sections 8 and 9, an individual is entitled-

 

(a) to be informed by any data controller whether personal data of which that individual is the data subject are being processed by or on behalf of that data controller,

 

(b) if that is the case, to be given by the data controller a description of-

 

(i) the personal data of which that individual is the data subject,

 

(ii) the purposes for which they are being or are to be processed, and

 

(iii) the recipients or classes of recipients to whom they are or may be disclosed,

 

© to have communicated to him in an intelligible form-

 

(i) the information constituting any personal data of which that individual is the data subject, and

 

(ii) any information available to the data controller as to the source of those data, and

 

(d) where the processing by automatic means of personal data of which that individual is the data subject for the purpose of evaluating matters relating to him such as, for example, his performance at work, his creditworthiness, his reliability or his conduct, has constituted or is likely to constitute the sole basis for any decision significantly affecting him, to be informed by the data controller of the logic involved in that decision-taking.

...

(7) An individual making a request under this section may, in such cases as may be prescribed, specify that his request is limited to personal data of any prescribed description.

 

(8.) Subject to subsection (4), a data controller shall comply with a request under this section promptly and in any event before the end of the prescribed period beginning with the relevant day.

 

How much more of the actual Act do they want thrown at them?????

 

... really, these people are absolute Muppets... and they shouldn't be in the damn job if they can't read English. If I had any employee acting as stupid as this, or giving information that was blatantly incorrect, then I would issue a very final warning.

 

It's the same with the Freedom of Information Act, you can ask youor local Council for example, for every damn email that's ever been whizzed around their system about you.... but that's another very long story ...;-)

I'm often a sarcastic SOB and speak my mind (and I don't do PC at all), but I have a laugh as I go. I won't be intimidated, and I don't take prisoners... so live with it, or go get yourself a humour implant :p

 

Copy of Law book from Amazon…£19.95, Refund Request stamp...32p, LBA stamp...also 32p, Court fees...£750.00,

The look on the bank's barrister's face, when they lost the '£25k Mother-of-all unfair charges' cases...(plus his £8k+ of costs)... Priceless!

 

The legal bit: These are my opinions and own view of legislation and process. I accept no liability whatsoever for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any or all of the advice given - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured legal professional.

Saying that, I've used these methods against many of these corporate crooks:evil: and won hands down!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
SB

 

I then wrote to Experian/Equifax whichever agency it was enclosing a copy of the IR letter and they said it would stay on my file for 6 years and they could not remove it etc etc I did consider 'set aside' but my question is, how did you get it removed from the credit file? because in other posts you state a CCJ being a court order cannot be removed??

 

Thanks for your help

Chris

 

I have just had a CCJ removed from my files and had no dealings with the CRAs. In the credit file it stated who lodged the CCJ on my record (Registry Trust) which is another paracitic privately owned company (in my opinion) who scoure the courts for info they can lodge on crdit files. They then charge a fee to have it removed.

 

I contacted them telling them we had made payment within the 30 day limit and could it be removed. They asked for evidence of who the claim was against (copy of court papers) and a copy of the cheque and the cheque clearing my account (or a letter from the originator saying all was good).

 

Registry trust (or whoever your paracitic lodger is) then ask for £4.50 and they then send message to all CRA to have it removed.

 

good luck

If I have helped click my scales....

 

Find my threads by clicking here

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you make full payment?
if this question was for me then yes. It was paid the day it was going to court. It was a dispute with our accountant over his fee and he started to use the legal route to get his fees. Knowing what I know now it would never have come to this.

 

PS, the hassle (in time) it takes to get rid of the CCJs, try everything to stop them going on in the first place, or if you have received 1 do everything to pay it off in the 30 window.

If I have helped click my scales....

 

Find my threads by clicking here

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just had a CCJ removed from my files and had no dealings with the CRAs. In the credit file it stated who lodged the CCJ on my record (Registry Trust) which is another paracitic privately owned company (in my opinion) who scoure the courts for info they can lodge on crdit files. They then charge a fee to have it removed.

 

I contacted them telling them we had made payment within the 30 day limit and could it be removed. They asked for evidence of who the claim was against (copy of court papers) and a copy of the cheque and the cheque clearing my account (or a letter from the originator saying all was good).

 

Registry trust (or whoever your paracitic lodger is) then ask for £4.50 and they then send message to all CRA to have it removed.

 

good luck

 

The difference here is that you paid within the 30 days, so to be honest they had no option but to remove it as in my view it should never have been on there anyway.

 

In my case the debt was paid in full but outside the 30 days, the IR said they have no objection at all, but the CRA said it stays for 6 years.

 

Having said all that with the information that is available now on CRS's by SB then I should be able to get it removed but I may have to apply for set aside?

 

I wil be looking at it as soon as I have time, it is not as straightforwrad as yours though, but thanks for the info anyway.

Chrismc v Vertex Data Science Ltd

SD Set Aside WON + Costs

 

 

Chrismc v Barclays

Won - Settlement Agreed at 11th Hour.

 

Philips Bailiffs

Lost - Judge changed at last minute, it didn't help!

 

G-MAC Early Redemption Charges Waived

Won - Early Redemtion Fees Waived in Full.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SB

I admire you for the information you have personally made available to everyone on here, however, I am confused, in post #25 in this thread, you state:

I still allow the CRAs to process my ongoing contracts..

Yet in other threads you say you have had this statement added to your credit file

"THE DATA SUBJECT HAS EXERCISED HIS RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 12(1) OF THE DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 AND HAS CHOSEN TO OPT OUT OF AUTOMATED PROCESSING AS OF 05 SEPT 2006. CREDIT STATUS ENQUIRIES SHOULD BE MADE VIA A MANUAL PROCESS."

How does this work? Does the first statement not contradict the latter. How can they process ongoing contracts if you have prevented them from automatically processing credit status enquiries?

Thanks

Chris

Chrismc v Vertex Data Science Ltd

SD Set Aside WON + Costs

 

 

Chrismc v Barclays

Won - Settlement Agreed at 11th Hour.

 

Philips Bailiffs

Lost - Judge changed at last minute, it didn't help!

 

G-MAC Early Redemption Charges Waived

Won - Early Redemtion Fees Waived in Full.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SB

 

I admire you for the information you have personally made available to everyone on here, however, I am confused, in post #25 in this thread, you state:

 

 

 

Yet in other threads you say you have had this statement added to your credit file

 

 

How does this work? Does the first statement not contradict the latter. How can they process ongoing contracts if you have prevented them from automatically processing credit status enquiries?

 

Thanks

Chris

 

The latter quote is in relation to someone SB was acting on behalf of :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The latter quote is in relation to someone SB was acting on behalf of :)

 

Thanks Tinkerbelle for clearing that up.

Chrismc v Vertex Data Science Ltd

SD Set Aside WON + Costs

 

 

Chrismc v Barclays

Won - Settlement Agreed at 11th Hour.

 

Philips Bailiffs

Lost - Judge changed at last minute, it didn't help!

 

G-MAC Early Redemption Charges Waived

Won - Early Redemtion Fees Waived in Full.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Does anybody know of a company that can help do all of this for me ?

i have a ccj that was wrong

i also have a default that is wrong

i have recently tried to change my mortgage only to find that i am almost un-mortgageable

i am not good with typing

i would like surlybonds to help if he would

david

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody know of a company that can help do all of this for me ?

i have a ccj that was wrong

i also have a default that is wrong

i have recently tried to change my mortgage only to find that i am almost un-mortgageable

i am not good with typing

i would like surlybonds to help if he would

david

 

How about maybe learning something that could help you more in life than keep paying people to do it for you. Not having a go but there are plenty of people (over 80,000) to point you in the right direction with a question and so forth but do a bit of reading and learn to do it yourself. It will make you feel better within yourself and also make you understand the consequences on what could ever happen again.

If you find this info useful please click on the scales in the bottom left corner of the thread :wink:

 

Vodafone To Remove Default Notices thread

Paid In Full HSBC Was Claiming £3851.42 But Instead of Paying Me Decided to pay my £4900 Loan OffDG Solictors. Need Help

Concluded Lloyds TSB 27/05/2006 Action Against LloydsTSB

Concluded Lloyds TSB for Girlfriend. 27/05/2006

Paid In Full Capital One £160 Settled

Paid In Full Capital One Sent 15/05/06 for £1372 for Girlfriend

Paid In Full Cetelem £130 Settled

Paid In Full The AA £400 Settled

Paid In Full First National £160 Settled

PDA LloydsTsb Credit Card Hand Delivered 26/04/06 £180

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about maybe learning something that could help you more in life that keep paying people to do it for you. Not having a go but there are plenty of people (over 80,000) to point you in the right direction with a question and so forth but do a bit of reading and learn to do it yourself. It will make you feel better within yourself and also make you understand the consequences on what could ever happen again.

 

 

You've been reading my posts :D I agree totally - it's that kind of inspiration that empowers you not just with debt problems but all those day in day out life things where someone somewhere pulls one over on you. Learn as we are all doing by reading joining in ASKING. People like the wonderful PPauls150 are just sitting there waiting to help people to help themselves. If it's hard to do - just ask and we'll help you along. Remember just one little thing - we all started just like you, afraid to speak out, unsure what to do, couldn't understand things, it was all a bit too much and god, wouldn't it be great if someone would do it for us? We'll write your letters, talk you through. You've learned how to register here and post on the forum. Open a thread, put whatever you like in it and sit back and the help will arrive - and its free - from all 80,000 of us. Once you've done it you'll grow inside.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Surly Bonds CONGRATULATIONS!!!

 

I was directed to your thread, as I have been looking for threads which concern default issues and came across your victory.:lol:

 

I wondered if you could help me??? I have tried reading all the pages of threads with defaults but can not see a start or finish or where to begin.

 

I had an account with Lloyds TSB that was used fraudulently. The Police are still investigating ( been about 4 years), and with in the first two years Lloyds TSB put a default notice. I have written to Experian asking them to take the notice off as I am still in dispute with the bank, I have been in endless correspondance with Lloyds who basically take no notice. The amount owed is about £2800, but suprise, suprise £1990 is made up of Charges and Interest. I am so annoyed and distressed by the situation as the Police are not helping, the bank is non-co-perative and all I want is the unjust default notice taken off!!

 

I am sorry to bother you with this, but it seems alot of people look to you for help and that you know what you are doing and have succeeded.

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

RubyNicola

 

x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Thanks for the advice. I need to start the process with Lloyds to reclaim, I have been helping two friends with theres and what with xmas and new year I have neglected my own- so I wil start.

 

Thanks again.

 

Rubynicola

xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
Just like the old Chinese bamboo story... unless you keep going, the end result will never happen...even when you felt like giving up..

 

We got a four page email this afternoon in relation to our calls to Experian yesterday. This was from the Directors' Office who must now be softly shi**ing themselves waiting for the onslaught... I have added my own comments (with the permission of the letter recipient)...

 

I cut some waffle paragraphs out - God, do they still try and wriggle, even when they're stuffed - but I hope you get the salient points and admission of wrongdoing.... by a CRA. Good grief...wonders will never cease.

 

I'll bet he was squirming in his seat having to write this, gnashing his teeth and sticking pins into a Voodoo doll of me. Ouch!

 

Read, digest, enjoy and then go have damn good s*x... because it's almost as good as that... okay maybe I'm totally exaggerrating that last bit!!!!

 

Our Ref: ************

BY E-MAIL AND POST

6 September 2006

 

Dear Mr ************

 

Thank you for your e-mail received 4 September 2006 and your telephone call yesterday. [You're so very welcome...but, have you got the hearing back in your right ear?]

 

I apologise if I caused any offence in my last e-mail and can assure you that this was not my intention. Nor was I attempting to scare or bully you by suggesting you contact the Information Commissioner in the first instance. This is the recommended course of action suggested in the Information Commissioners own literature. Their leaflet 'Taking a Case to Court' also advises that a court will wish to know what steps you have taken to try and settle your claim. [that's right - grovel all you like now I've threatened to send your letter to the I.C.O. and sue your sad ars*s in a Court of Law]

 

I have been informed that the wording on our web-site is being amended to reflect a more accurate portrayal of our rights with regards to your information. [Ahem?... could it have been anymore 'less' accurate???] The suggested wording is as follows:

 

"We have a legal right to hold information about people that is already in the public domain (e.g. CCJs, IVAs, etc). Other information is collected and supplied under cover of the Data Protection Act 1998 Schedule 2.1 which says that the data subject should have given their consent. This will be collected by your lender or supplier when you apply for a product. A section on the application form will typically direct you to a section on the use of your personal data and will state that "by proceeding you are agreeing to your information being used in this way"."

 

I trust that this now meets with your approval. [Yes, maybe I should have even charged publishing fees for my wording!;) ] As discussed I can also confirm that as far as we are aware there is no specific piece of documentation or legislation that provides us with the right to retain your information for six years from the date an account is settled. [GOOD GOD!!!!!!:eek: .... they now FINALLY admit in writing!! halle-blu**y-lujah]

 

It was agreed throughout the credit industry that six years is considered a reasonable amount of time for account data to be retained from the point that an account is settled in accordance with the 5th Data Protection Principle.

 

 

[and this bit is absolutely vital to my whole initial argument:]

 

This information would only be retained with your consent as per the terms and conditions of the particular account you held. [Thank you for agreeing with me ... at last]

 

The generic terms and conditions I referred to in our telephone conversation can be found on the Orange web-site and read as follows:

 

19.3 Your information

Orange or its Group companies will use your information which you provide to us together with other information for administration, marketing, credit scoring, customer services, tracking your Device and web use preferences, and profiling your purchasing preferences. We will disclose your information to our service providers and agents to help us with these purposes. We will keep your information for a reasonable period after your contract with us has finished in case you decide to use our Services again and may contact you about our Services during this time. [Yes, I know what they NOW say - it was my kicking that forced to try a new tactic]

 

I am unable to comment on the specific terms and conditions you signed up to when agreeing your contract with Orange. [so STFU then and stop pretending you know all about what was agreed to] All companies that subscribe to our services are required to comply with our suggested consent wording which can be located on our web-site at the following address:

 

http://www.experian.co.uk/corporate/compliance/fairobtainingclauses/index.html

 

...

 

As requested I am also adding the following Notice of Correction to your credit report until you notify us that it is no longer required:

 

"THE DATA SUBJECT HAS EXERCISED HIS RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 12(1) OF THE DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 AND HAS CHOSEN TO OPT OUT OF AUTOMATED PROCESSING AS OF 05 SEPT 2006. CREDIT STATUS ENQUIRIES SHOULD BE MADE VIA A MANUAL PROCESS."

 

I would recommend that when applying for credit you notify each lender of your request as we cannot guarantee that a company will follow the instructions outlined above.

 

I have added this statement to the electoral roll information appearing on your report. As this is information you agree we are entitled to hold, it will be available to anyone searching your details regardless of any other entries being removed from your report.

 

If you have any further queries, please feel free to contact me directly either by e-mail at *********@uk.experian.com, by telephone on ********** or by writing to me at the following address:

 

Directors' Office, Experian Ltd, PO Box 8000, Nottingham, NG80 7WF

 

Yours sincerely

 

Mr * * *******

Consumer Compliance Executive

Directors' Office

 

 

 

I've absolutely NO idea how many thousands of words I have typed into letters, emails or this forum, but when I get a result like this, I can honestly say that each and every damn key press was worth it.

 

Now, excuse me whilst I go and have a quiet lie-down and recover...:rolleyes:

 

me-----> ckick.gif

I wrote the following to Experian based on your success story:

 

Could you delete the electronic version of any entries from Hutchison 3G UK Ltd on my credit file. Access to this information is only allowed maually (data protection act 1998). I request that any electronic information from 3G (including the name Hutchison 3G UK Ltd and all details relating to the account status be removed). All other information on my file could be accessed electronically

 

 

"NOTICE UNDER SECTION 12(1) OF THE DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 TO PREVENT PROCESSING OF DATA BY AUTOMATIC MEANS."

 

Please view the attachment below for the legal justification for the above. If you refuse to implement the above, I shall issue legal proceedings in 28 days from today.

 

Regards

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/preventing_decisions_based_on_automated_processing_of_personal_information.pdf

 

I got this response below from Paul Lever. It is a standard response I have already seen on CAG website.

 

> Thank you for your e-mail received on 3 May 2007. Your correspondence

has been brought to my attention in the Directors' Office.

>

> I acknowledge your request under Section 12(1) of the Data Protection

Act 1998, which entitles an individual to write to a data controller to

require that data controller to ensure that no decision which

significantly affects them is made solely by automatic means

>

> I am fully aware of the legislation that you kindly quoted in your

letter, which is detailed below for your reference.

>

> 12. - (1) An individual is entitled at any time, by notice in writing

to any data controller, to require the data controller to ensure that

no decision taken by or on behalf of the data controller which

significantly affects that individual is based solely on the processing by

automatic means of personal data in respect of which that individual is the

data subject for the purpose of evaluating matters relating to him such

as, for example, his performance at work, his creditworthiness, his

reliability or his conduct.

>

> As a credit reference agency, Experian does not make any automated

decisions with regards your creditworthiness or any of the other criteria

that are specified within Section 12(1). Consequently, we do not have

to comply with your request to remove the information that we process by

automatic means. This is because we are not making any decisions about

the information that we obtain and process via automated systems.

>

> I have highlighted the relevant part of Section 12(1) that clarifies

that it is only when a decision is made by automated processing that

you are entitled to have that automated decision reconsidered (s.12

(2)(b)).

>

> I would like to clarify that our role is to give lenders factual

information about you when you apply for credit. This helps lenders as it

enables them to review your current and previous credit agreements but

also benefits the applicant as they can be granted credit facilities

instantly rather than having to prove that they have a good financial

history every time they make an application.

>

> When a lender asks to see the information we hold, we do not offer

any comment or advice. Lenders use the information we give them, along

with the information you give on a credit application form, to help them

decide whether or not to lend. We are not told if the information we

have provided has affected the lending decision or, in fact, what that

decision is.

>

> If you have been declined for financial services and the lender

concerned confirms that the decision was made via an automated process then

you do have the right to appeal against that decision and request that

your application is manually reviewed.

>

> You may wish to quote the legislation you referred to in your e-mail

in support of any request that you may make to a lender for a manual

assessment.

>

> It is also stipulated within Section 5 (Principles of

Decision-Making) of 'The Guide to Credit Scoring 2000', that the applicant can appeal

for a manual decision to be made if they have been declined purely by

means of an automated scoring process.

>

> You might wish to view 'The Guide to Credit Scoring 2000', in

particular Section 5-7, if you wish to see this in full. You can find this on

the Experian website at:

>

> www.experian.co.uk/corporate/compliance/creditscoring

>

> The Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Data Protection Act 1998

strictly control the personal information that we hold. Both laws give you

specific rights and make sure we deal with your information carefully and

fairly.

>

> I note your intention to issue legal proceedings against Experian if

we do not comply with your request. We will refer the matter to our

legal representatives once in receipt of this.

>

> We believe that your threat of legal action is without merit.

Consequently, if you do choose to issue proceedings we will instruct our

solicitors to apply to strike out your case and we will seek to reclaim the

costs incurred in doing so. >

>

> I therefore recommend that you review your legal position prior to

proceeding with your claim. You may wish to consult with our regulator,

the Information Commissioner's Office, in order to obtain an unbiased

opinion.

>

> The Information Commissioner's Office: Wycliffe House, Water Lane,

Wilmslow, SK9 5AF

>

> If you have any further queries please contact me directly either by

e-mail at [email protected] or by telephone on 0115 905 5452.

Alternatively, you can write to me at the following address:

>

> Directors' Office, Consumer Help Service, Experian Ltd, PO Box 8000,

Nottingham, NG80 7WF

>

> Kind regards

>

>

> Paul Lever

> Consumer Compliance Executive

> Directors' Office

 

I replied as follows:

 

In the case of the dafault you have no legal standing for this information to acessed on my file for automatic processing (regardless of what conclusions will be drawn from such).Under the terminology of the Data Protection Act (Section 1(1)) of the Act, "processing" also means "disclosing":

 

"processing", in relation to information or data, means obtaining, recording or holding the information or data or carrying out any operation or set of operations on the information or data, including-

 

(a) organisation, adaptation or alteration of the information or data,

 

(b) retrieval, consultation or use of the information or data,

 

© disclosure of the information or data by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, or

 

OFT and I.C.O. both confirmed that that the CRAs have absolutely no legal right to hold any default unless it is specifically in the terms of the contract, or is public information.

 

under the basic rights of the First principle of the Act:

See schedule 2 of the Act: Your rights are limited by the following:

 

1. The data subject has given his consent to the processing.

2. The processing is necessary-

(a) for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is a party, or

(b) for the taking of steps at the request of the data subject with a view to entering into a contract.

3. The processing is necessary for compliance with any legal obligation to which the data controller is subject, other than an obligation imposed by contract.

4. The processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject.

5. The processing is necessary-

(a) for the administration of justice,

(b) for the exercise of any functions conferred on any person by or under any enactment,

© for the exercise of any functions of the Crown, a Minister of the Crown or a government department, or

(d) for the exercise of any other functions of a public nature exercised in the public interest by any person.

6. - (1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.

(2) The Secretary of State may by order specify particular circumstances in which this condition is, or is not, to be taken to be satisfied.

 

Furthermore there is NO recommendation report advising the CRAs to hold historic account data for six years (other than a spoken agreement in the 1980s that has since been superseeded by the Data Protection Act 1999.

 

Paul Lever responded as follows:

 

Thank you for your e-mails received on 8 May 2007.

I have looked through the attached document that you have sent to me and I note that this is a document available on the Information Commissioner's website.

This document relates to Section 12 of the Data Protection Act 1998 and an individual's right to prevent a data controller from making decisions about them by automated processing.

I have explained quite clearly in my previous e-mail that we do not make any decisions about the data that we process. Therefore Section 12 does not apply to us. If you wish to verify this you should contact the Information Commissioner's Office.

In relation to any credit applications that you make, you should serve a Section 12 notice on the company that you are applying to if you do not want them to assess your applications using an automated process.

I note that you are aware that we retain account information on a credit report for six years from the date that an account is registered as being defaulted. I would also like to highlight that the same applies to accounts that are cancelled at the point that they are settled/closed, irrespective of the payment history of the account.

In both of these instances, the original contract agreed between the consumer and the lender has effectively been terminated. However, as the individual concerned consented to information being passed to a credit reference agency when signing the original agreement, they are consenting to that information being held and used in accordance with credit industry standards.

It was agreed throughout the credit industry and the Information Commissioner has not challenged the decision, that six years is considered a reasonable amount of time for account data to be retained from the point that an account is settled/defaulted. This is because it enables lenders to make responsible lending decisions when processing applications by having access to an individual's credit history over this period. This has been in effect for many years and is regularly referred to as the general standard for Credit Reference Agencies.

I see that you have quoted the 5th Data Protection Principle, which states:

"Personal data processed for any purpose shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose."

Broadly speaking, this principle is designed to make the period for which data is retained something that organisations can define themselves, as long as they can justify their reasons for doing so. We feel that as it was agreed throughout the credit industry and in accordance with the relevant regulatory bodies that six years is an acceptable period to hold account information, that we are fully justified in retaining account data for this period.

With regards to the issue of your consent, we have also recently been in contact with the Information Commissioner in connection with defaulted accounts being retained for six years from the date of default.

The Information Commissioner has recently informed us that we do not require your consent to continue processing account information about you for six years.

As you may be aware the first data protection principle states that:

Personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless:

  • at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met; and
  • in the case of sensitive personal data, at least one of the conditions in Schedule 3 is also met.

One of the conditions for processing in Schedule 2 is that the individual has given his consent to the processing. It is the view of the Information Commissioner that consent is not easy to achieve and that organisations should consider other conditions for processing before looking at consent.

In the context of applying for credit, consent to share information with the credit reference agencies cannot be freely given. This is because if you do not agree to your data being shared then your application will simply be rejected. In other words you have no choice if you want the credit on offer.

The Information Commissioner has notified us that the condition for processing below covers the sharing of account data with the credit reference agencies for the duration of a contract and six years beyond.

"The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case because of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject."

We have been informed that the Information Commissioner takes a wide view of the legitimate interests and considers that it is in the interests of other creditors to make informed lending decisions.

Account information is held by credit reference agencies for a period of six years after the account was last active. In addition to current credit commitments, the preceding six years of an individual's credit history is taken into account by credit grantors when applications for credit facilities are assessed.

As a consequence, this historical information is relevant to the purpose of credit referencing and by holding this data the Information Commissioner has confirmed that the credit reference agencies do not appear to be in breach of the fifth principle.

You may wish to access the link below, which relates to a letter we recently received from the Information Commissioner on this issue and which is accessible through our website.

http://www.experian.co.uk/downloads/compliance/dataprotection_guidanceondefaults.pdf

I hope that this clarifies our position and why we feel that we are justified in how we process information in light of the Information Commissioner's comments.

Kind regards

Mr Paul Lever

 

Consumer Compliance Executive

Directors' Office

 

 

I AM NOT EXACTLY SURE WHERE TO GO FROM HERE, CAN ANYONE HELP?:eek:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Experian are not budging when I tried to do the same thing you did. You can find my post from earlier today. Could you please send me a copy of your letter? Or at least the person who sent it to you from Experian and when it was sent.

Thanks for your help in advance. You have been a great help in educating me since i joined this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like the old Chinese bamboo story... unless you keep going, the end result will never happen...even when you felt like giving up..

 

We got a four page email this afternoon in relation to our calls to Experian yesterday. This was from the Directors' Office who must now be softly shi**ing themselves waiting for the onslaught... I have added my own comments (with the permission of the letter recipient)...

 

I cut some waffle paragraphs out - God, do they still try and wriggle, even when they're stuffed - but I hope you get the salient points and admission of wrongdoing.... by a CRA. Good grief...wonders will never cease.

 

I'll bet he was squirming in his seat having to write this, gnashing his teeth and sticking pins into a Voodoo doll of me. Ouch!

 

Read, digest, enjoy and then go have damn good s*x... because it's almost as good as that... okay maybe I'm totally exaggerrating that last bit!!!!;)

 

Our Ref: ************

BY E-MAIL AND POST

6 September 2006

 

Dear Mr ************

 

Thank you for your e-mail received 4 September 2006 and your telephone call yesterday. [You're so very welcome...but, have you got the hearing back in your right ear?]:rolleyes:

 

I apologise if I caused any offence in my last e-mail and can assure you that this was not my intention. Nor was I attempting to scare or bully you by suggesting you contact the Information Commissioner in the first instance. This is the recommended course of action suggested in the Information Commissioners own literature. Their leaflet 'Taking a Case to Court' also advises that a court will wish to know what steps you have taken to try and settle your claim. [that's right - grovel all you like now I've threatened to send your letter to the I.C.O. and sue your sad ars*s in a Court of Law]

 

I have been informed that the wording on our web-site is being amended to reflect a more accurate portrayal of our rights with regards to your information. [Ahem?... could it have been anymore 'less' accurate???] The suggested wording is as follows:

 

"We have a legal right to hold information about people that is already in the public domain (e.g. CCJs, IVAs, etc). Other information is collected and supplied under cover of the Data Protection Act 1998 Schedule 2.1 which says that the data subject should have given their consent. This will be collected by your lender or supplier when you apply for a product. A section on the application form will typically direct you to a section on the use of your personal data and will state that "by proceeding you are agreeing to your information being used in this way"."

 

I trust that this now meets with your approval. [Yes, maybe I should have even charged publishing fees for my wording!;) ] As discussed I can also confirm that as far as we are aware there is no specific piece of documentation or legislation that provides us with the right to retain your information for six years from the date an account is settled. [GOOD GOD!!!!!!:eek: .... they now FINALLY admit in writing!! halle-blu**y-lujah]

 

It was agreed throughout the credit industry that six years is considered a reasonable amount of time for account data to be retained from the point that an account is settled in accordance with the 5th Data Protection Principle.

 

 

[and this bit is absolutely vital to my whole initial argument:]

 

This information would only be retained with your consent as per the terms and conditions of the particular account you held. [Thank you for agreeing with me ... at last]

 

The generic terms and conditions I referred to in our telephone conversation can be found on the Orange web-site and read as follows:

 

19.3 Your information

Orange or its Group companies will use your information which you provide to us together with other information for administration, marketing, credit scoring, customer services, tracking your Device and web use preferences, and profiling your purchasing preferences. We will disclose your information to our service providers and agents to help us with these purposes. We will keep your information for a reasonable period after your contract with us has finished in case you decide to use our Services again and may contact you about our Services during this time. [Yes, I know what they NOW say - it was my kicking that forced to try a new tactic]

 

I am unable to comment on the specific terms and conditions you signed up to when agreeing your contract with Orange. [so STFU then and stop pretending you know all about what was agreed to] All companies that subscribe to our services are required to comply with our suggested consent wording which can be located on our web-site at the following address:

 

http://www.experian.co.uk/corporate/compliance/fairobtainingclauses/index.html

 

...

 

As requested I am also adding the following Notice of Correction to your credit report until you notify us that it is no longer required:

 

"THE DATA SUBJECT HAS EXERCISED HIS RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 12(1) OF THE DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 AND HAS CHOSEN TO OPT OUT OF AUTOMATED PROCESSING AS OF 05 SEPT 2006. CREDIT STATUS ENQUIRIES SHOULD BE MADE VIA A MANUAL PROCESS."

 

I would recommend that when applying for credit you notify each lender of your request as we cannot guarantee that a company will follow the instructions outlined above.

 

I have added this statement to the electoral roll information appearing on your report. As this is information you agree we are entitled to hold, it will be available to anyone searching your details regardless of any other entries being removed from your report.

 

If you have any further queries, please feel free to contact me directly either by e-mail at *********@uk.experian.com, by telephone on ********** or by writing to me at the following address:

 

Directors' Office, Experian Ltd, PO Box 8000, Nottingham, NG80 7WF

 

Yours sincerely

 

Mr * * *******

Consumer Compliance Executive

Directors' Office

 

 

I've absolutely NO idea how many thousands of words I have typed into letters, emails or this forum, but when I get a result like this, I can honestly say that each and every damn key press was worth it.

 

Now, excuse me whilst I go and have a quiet lie-down and recover...:rolleyes:

 

me-----> ckick.gif

Sorry it's the same message but I just needed to quote your original message for clarification.

Experian are not budging when I tried to do the same thing you did. You can find my post from earlier today. Could you please send me a copy of your letter? Or at least the person who sent it to you from Experian and when it was sent.

Thanks for your help in advance. You have been a great help in educating me since i joined this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not a Lender, it's THREE (arguably the most arrogant Company in the UK). The CRA said I signed an agreement with THREE to share my information.

Have you got a copy of the agreement? Have you CCA'd them to force them to either provide the copy or say they do not have it/

 

If they supply it, there will be nothing in it to say it can stay on file for 6 years. If they can't supply it then they have no written, signed proof they can share it.

 

Then you cna take them to court and claim damages for affecting your credit rating. Also a complaint to the ICO could be in order.

 

I have now gone down this route for a few different companies and it has worked.

If I have helped click my scales....

 

Find my threads by clicking here

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...