Should CRAs be outlawed?

[The Debt Star]

IMO yes, they should.

 

The protection of personal data - and its subsequent use and misuse by lenders and the CRAs - is of fundamental importance to a person's enjoyment of his or her right to respect for private and family life. Such that DCAs and their ilk can access a person's data to see not only where they live but how much their home is worth and who else is in the bun fight to get at it. Also landlords asking to see credit files; employers as well - and livelihoods and careers destroyed by something which started life as a conduit for mail order catalogues in the 1970s.

 

Ban 'em.

[rebel11]

You could start a campaign, with the info their data is based on, i.e. Penalty Charges, Mis-sold PPI and crazy Credit Limits increased without the customers

say so, credit files are so misleading.

[cups]

Yes, well said!

 

Strictly speaking they get away with everything they do that is unfair and no one takes any action.

 

I thought one of the first principles of data was that it was current and had 'provenance', some holders of data never update it regularly because it costs them. To my mind if you put data on someone's file you should have to keep it up to date, and if you search you should have a valid reason not just 'fishing' !!!

 

Rant over!

[The Debt Star]

Who'd have thought that buying crap from Freemans Catalogue back in 1976 could have led to this? I don't think anyone back then saw the CRAs, lenders and the next-door-neighbour-and-his cat come landlord who rents out a buy-to-let abusing technology to this extent.

[james.maperson]

IMO yes, they should.

 

The protection of personal data - and its subsequent use and misuse by lenders and the CRAs - is of fundamental importance to a person's enjoyment of his or her right to respect for private and family life. Such that DCAs and their ilk can access a person's data to see not only where they live but how much their home is worth and who else is in the bun fight to get at it. Also landlords asking to see credit files; employers as well - and livelihoods and careers destroyed by something which started life as a conduit for mail order catalogues in the 1970s.

 

Ban 'em.

 

What a load of chip-on-your-shoulder rubbish. What happens when you need to get a loan for a new car then? How is a lender going to assess your risk level without looking at how you've handled agreements before?

[The Debt Star]

work for one do you? er, that'll be "Yes" I think.

 

Mate, when you start working for an ethical employer and choose not to work for abusive outfits like CRAs I'll listen to your opinions.

[The Debt Star]

What a load of chip-on-your-shoulder rubbish.

 

oh and I won't be the only person who has views on CRAs that you consider "rubbish."

[247orbital]

They do serve a purpose but they are not controlled anywhere near enough. Legislation should be introduced which makes them personally liable for incorrect data. I'd also like to see any new or updated data like defaults etc resulting in the person being contacted and being given adequate time (at least 60 days) to query the information. DCA's should have to have ALL the paper work relating to a debt/account before any information is placed on your CF.

Credit searches are a fact of modern life and are now used more frequently (rightly or wrongly) and yet the safe guards are in all honesty complete crap. My recent case has proven this, they say 200 checks, and yet it wasn't until I personally sent them copies of the data they finally relented after 15 months.

[inkslinger]

Its a rotten system, Ill say it until I'm blue in the face. The regulation on something that affects people so much is so poor its an absolute joke.

[james.maperson]

work for one do you? er, that'll be "Yes" I think.

 

Mate, when you start working for an ethical employer and choose not to work for abusive outfits like CRAs I'll listen to your opinions.

 

I have worked in banking and moved on to work for a Credit Reference Agency. If you want to see unethical practices, look at the retail banking industry and see nonsense like 'pre-approved' credit cards, or PPI.

CRAs are completely neutral, they simply hold information passed to them by lenders. Lenders have a responsibility to ensure data is given correctly to the CRA. Considering anyone who has ever opened just one credit agreement will have a credit report, it is impossible (and not expected by law) for a Credit Reference Agency to ensure all records are correct. If you think the information on your report is incorrect, ask the CRA to query it, but the data is owned by the lender. If the lender says it stays, it stays, and your complaint then is with the lender, NOT the CRA.

I'm fascinated by what you mean by us being 'abusive' as well.

[sillygirl1]

I agree with the sentiments, the CRAs are part of the reason we now have a double dip recession, ANY data they hold should be removed after maybe TWO years, not SIX and not held archived forever.

 

I am now in a position where I had a bad patch six years ago which is preventing me from getting a new job, and moving home, despite the fact that all LEGITIMATE debts have long been repaid.

 

I did have a petition to government before but it was stopped when they had the election, something to bear in mind when putting up petitions is now if you get 500 votes the petition will go to a minister.....

[Robotix]

I agree that CRA's need to be either disbanded or properly regulated.

 

I had fallen foul to the lack of regulation. I tried to get credit and was turned down. When I investigated it I found out the council house I had moved into was blacklisted. Whilst I lived there I never managed to get credit due to the blacklisting.

 

Now when I moved the new property was not blacklisted and I can get credit.

 

With the above in mind how can anyone say CRA's are doing a good or just job.

[james.maperson]

Robotix - just for info you cannot have a blacklisted house. A lender can only see information in your name, or those you have a financial association with (i.e those with whom you have applied for credit jointly in the past).

 

Someone could have gone bankrupt whilst living at that house before you, and it wouldn't affect your chances of getting credit.

[Robotix]

Very odd, well all I can do is state what was said to me by the people I was trying to get credit through. All I can suggest is they did not tell me the truth or did not know what they were doing or going on about.

 

Robotix - just for info you cannot have a blacklisted house. A lender can only see information in your name, or those you have a financial association with (i.e those with whom you have applied for credit jointly in the past).

 

Someone could have gone bankrupt whilst living at that house before you, and it wouldn't affect your chances of getting credit.

[The Debt Star]

II'm fascinated by what you mean by us being 'abusive' as well.

 

Hi Punxsutawney Phil. Well, I should imagine that might be you using data held on machines knowns as computers for 6 years; and maybe that might be you archiving that data beyond 6 years just in case the law changes to allow you to post it for longer. Might just be because you do not investigate inaccuracies on credit files properly and make excuses about it being the lender's responsibility and not yours, whereas as the data controller jointly with the lenders you have a duty to record accurate data. May not amount to much in your books but to many of us who cannpt find work or a place to rent because of the data posted by CRAs (much of which is inaccurate) it is a big deal. No you do not work for an ethical organsiation. You have moved from one bunch of crooks to another.

[hightail]

CRAs are completely neutral, they simply hold information passed to them by lenders

How is that neutral? In my experience they will accept wrong information without question from all sorts of organisations but not the truth from from an individual.

[WhatALife]

They should be regulated properly, in fact the current rules and regulations regarding CRA's are no where near strict enough.

 

I also believe that since the information is about us then we should be entitled to that information for free, let the lenders pay instead of the consumer.

 

Maybe there should only be one CRA rather than three so the information held is in one place rather than having some info with one agency, some more with a second agency and some more with a third agency. Keep it all in one place. I just checked my report with 3 different credit report agencies and the info is different on each one. One report showed me to be a bad debtor while another made me look like the best person in the world to lend to

 

And as someone has already mentioned, they should only keep info on file for two years rather than six.

 

Just my two pennies worth.

 

Have a great day

[247orbital]

Not to mention the CRA's allowing table 1 searches by DCA's who don't even offer credit services, track and trace is what table 2 searches are for. But I'm sure the CRA's will as usual pass the buck back to the OC/DCA's. They know they are getting away with murder, unregulated, for profit companies profiting from MY personal data.

Well the writings on the wall, its only a matter of time before they are held to account and become fully regulated.