Inaccurate info on credit file

[MAGDA]

Hi all, just in the process of completing the claim form to the ICO and will attach the evidence then and email. Just been looking at the reply I received from Lloyds TSB again. They state: "My understanding of your complaint is that a default was registered on your credit file in 2010. You have stated that this account was defaulted in 2004 and this should be reflected on your credit file. A default notice is issued to inform a customer that an account will be defaulted if it continues to run as it has been. However, the default is not applicable until the account is transferred to our Consumer Debt Recovery Dept." They then go on to say that a solicitor's letter and a DN must be issued before it can be passed to their CDR dept. These were sent in 2010, they say. Would this be evidence enough to put my case to the ICO? Lloyds are basically saying that although a DN was issued in 2004, this was not relevant because the account wasn't passed to their Consumer debt recovery people. I did not rectify the default situation, i.e, I didn't clear the arrears as instructed, I simply made very reduced payments of £5 per month, so the arrears did continue to accrue. Lloyds also say "Your comments regarding the arrears beng cleared have been noted, however, I cannot find any evidence to suggest that this was done against your wishes." They won't find any evidence to show it was done with my consent, either. They simply went ahead and did it, then started reporting adverse information on the credit file. All of our creditors did the same thing, issued a DN and then mostly accepted reduced payments (prior to selling the debts on!). The difference being that late payments were shown and defaults entered on the credit file pretty much straight away, ie., within six months on so. This was then a true reflection of our situation and the Defaults have now dropped off.

 

Any advice much appreciated.

 

Magda

Edited September 17, 2011 by MAGDA

[MAGDA]

In those circumstances then an arrangement to pay flag should be placed on the credit file and if a default is to be issues it should be issued at the start or very close to it of the arrangement, the ICO guidelines are quite clear that a person who is making an attempt to repay his debt should not be placed at a disadvantage compared to someone who just doesnt pay and picks up the default straight away... thats stated clearly in the ICO default guidelines.

 

S.

 

Hi Shadow, just looking at the old copy of my credit file from 2009, it clearly states on it that the arrangement start date was 2007 and in actual fact, this was just an updated arrangement date, because the arrangement actually began in 2004ish. Lloyds regularly carry out reviews, so I can only think that each time a review was done, the arrangement start date was amended, adding to the confusion. They have said they couldn't enter into an arrangement prior to 2010 because the account hadn't formally been passed (so they say) to the debt recovery dept. This proves that this isn't the case.

[MAGDA]

Well, complaints for both Lloyds TSB and GE Money have been emailed to the ICO over the weekend, so will update as soon as I hear anything.

 

Magda

[brokebutnotbeatn]

subbing - interested as after a year of being in an AR I have had Barclays place a Default on the account...

[MAGDA]

Yes, they certainly like messing with our credit files - will let you know if I have any success.

[MAGDA]

Just rang the ICO and was told that althought my complaints against Lloyds and GE Money have been allocated to their complaints resolution team to deal with, they are only just picking up on complaints from July - looks like I am in for a long wait and yet, these companies can add incorrect info on our credit files in an instant. I was told by the person I spoke to from the ICO that I can always take the company to court if I want... yes, would save them from having to do their job I suppose.

[MAGDA]

Hi, this is still ongoing. Still waiting for the ICO to investigate complaints I made against LLOYDS and also GE Money, have now been told they will probably get round to dealing with my complaint in the New Year as they are only just dealing with complaints from August and have a vast backlog. Meanwhile, complained again to the credit ref agencies, who so far have done absolutely nothing. I have requested a notice of correction on the credit file, but at the moment they are in the process of 'investigating' although there doesn't seem to be any indication that this is the case.

 

Anyway, had a further letter from GE Money. They now say that a default was registered against my account in June 2004 with the CRAs. the default was due to remain on my file for six years. Due to the level of arrears the debt was sold to Link Financial. Link Financial was unable to take the matter any further (that's one way of putting it!) and in 2009 transferred the account back to GE. Ge further state that since they re-purchased the account, there have been entries on my credit file showing the account as status 6. They say that although a default was registered on my account it did not mean that the agreement had ended. "As you are aware, the debt was purchased after the default had been registered." GE say that when the debt was bought back by them in 2009 it remained outstanding and the loan agreement was still in place. After the default expired, they say, in June 2010, information regarding the account was therefore still being sent to the CRAs. The status of 6 has been reported because they have not received any payments from me and the debt has not been settled. They consider the current reporting to be within their rights and an accurate picture of my account conduct. They are now reviewing matters regarding the outstanding balance and their collections people will be in touch (can't wait ). So that's that for now - would really appreciate any opinions on what GE has said if Shadow or any others are around to help.

 

How are you getting on Beachy, did you get your own problem with GE sorted in the end. The ICO told me that the CRAs should remove incorrect info if you have provided evidence to back this up, however, the CRA disagree and say that they will only remove something if the creditor tells them to! I told the ICO that in actual fact this doesn't happen, the CRA's will not remove incorrec info at the say so of the consumer. The ICO's answer to this, and their huge backlog is that I can always take the creditor to court. Can't win can you.

 

many thanks,

 

Magda

Edited December 13, 2011 by MAGDA

[suekelly]

I've read this thread with interest. I'm also a "victim" of LloydsTSB's underhand practices.

 

I received a default from them in November 2005 after contacting the CAB for help. The CAB wrote to them explaining that I was experiencing financial difficulties and asking them to agree to a token payment of £1 per month. They wrote to the CAB turning down this offer (I owed them around £6500 at this point and my arrears were around £250). LTSB refused to accept this and stated that they would be issuing a default notice and would then pass the account to their relevant department. I was advised not to pay anything until this process was completed.

 

I then received a letter from LTSB's solicitors stating that although they'd served a default notice, I had still not brought my account up to date and they threatened legal action.They said LTSB had closed the account and that I should send the cut up my credit card and send it to the bank - which I did. I then agreed to pay them £5 a month which was arranged through the CAB and they froze my account (didn't charge any more interest).

 

Skip forward 2 years to 2007 and they issued another default notice. Skip forward another two years to 2009 and they issued another default notice. During this time my payments ranged from £1 to £30 a month (£30 was only for a couple of months after pressure from Credit Solutions who'd inherited the account) and I paid whatever was agreed each month without missing any payments.

 

At this point I didn't know that they weren't able to issue more than one default. I recently sent for a credit report and discovered that the only default recorded is the one they served in 2009. I called LTSB three times to query this and was told that if the default was not registered with the credit agencies then it wasn't valid. It seems that neither the 2005 or the the 2007 defaults were registered for some reason. They asked why I hadn't contacted them in 2005 and 2007 when the defaults didn't appear on my credit reports. I told them that I hadn't checked my reports so wasn't aware of this. I was then told that I was told that it was my responsibility to regularly check my credit files and that it was also my responsibility to have informed the bank that they had failed to register the defaults in 2005 and 2007. I told them that I was certain that no such requirement was set out in my credit agreement for this account.

 

I've kept every bit of correspondence I've received from them so have all the default notices, solicitors letters etc. I wrote to Lloyds at the beginning of January after failing to receive a promised letter from them. They've not yet responded. I've also written to Experian, Callcredit and Equifax sending them all the documents and asking them to amend their incorrect records. I've now received responses from all the agencies stating that they've been in touch with LTSB and the information they hold is correct. I'm now raising a complaint with the ICO.

 

I totally agree with all the posts here. The situation is very frustrating and completely unacceptable. Maybe we should all inundate the same court with claims of infringement of the ICO guidelines requesting significant damages from Lloyds and the Agencies.

[MAGDA]

Hi sue, yes, it is very frustrating. Whenever you complain to the credit ref agencies you are told that the creditor says the information they hold is correct and therefore it will remain on your file - it doesn't seem to make any difference whatsoever, even if you provide evidence to back up your argument, what the creditor says is final. Equifax were particularly bad, they totally ignored the letters we uploaded providing evidence that the info they held was incorrect - then they closed the case and said that it had been dealt with, when in actual fact they had done absolutely nothing at all. If you ring them you just go through to a call centre in india or somewhere.

 

However, I have complained to the ICO re: the GE Money problem I have had and also Lloyds Tsb and just to warn you, they do have quite a backlog - it took them around four months to deal with my complaints. I have just heard back that the ICO has found in our favour re: GE Money and is advising them to remove the information from our credit files. I am still waiting to hear back on the Lloyds one. One thing the ICO did say was that they aren't taking any further action against GE Money as this seems to be a one off mistake on their part - which I know for a fact isn't the case. So, the more complaints they get about any one company, especially if it is for a similar scenario, then the better.

 

In my case the account actually defaulted in 2004, but Lloyds didn't report it to the Credit ref agencies. We have made token payments since 2004, but Lloyds suddenly decided in 2010 to place a default on our credit file, which is grossly unfair. They claimed it hadn't been passed to their official collections dept prior to 2010 and a default doesn't become active until this happens, absolute rubbish. Did Lloyds write to you around 2009ish and say that they were clearing your arrears as a gesture of goodwill, and then expect you to resume making your normal contractual repayments? This is what they did to us and many others and when we couldn't make those payments they started to report that we were in arrears again with the CRAs.

 

Hope you get things sorted out - get a complaint off to the ICO as soon as you can - it's worth a shot!

 

regards, Magda

[suekelly]

Hi Magda,

 

No, they didn't write to me in 2009. The last correspondence I received from them was December 2008 when they sent the last of their three default notices. They sent this as a response to a "request to write-off letter" at a time when I was caring full time for my terminally ill mother and was suffering from clinical depression. Sympathy and underdstanding must not feature very high in their training!

 

I'm sending my ICO complaint form off today with all my documentation and will then wait to hear from them. I'm also going to write to each of the credit agencies asking them to put a Notice of Correction on their records stating, "The accuracy of this information is under query by the data subject and has been referred to the ICO for guidance and/or disciplinary action." I'm also writing to Lloyds again to inform them of the action I've taken. You never know... this might make them take action Good luck with your complaint!

 

Regards

Sue

[MAGDA]

Hi, sorry to hear about your Mother and your other problems - Lloyds TSB and other such companies don't know the meaning of the word 'sympathy' unfortunately. I wish you good luck with your complaint as well and hope it goes your way. Let us know what happens!

 

regards, Magda

[MAGDA]

Just an update. As mentioned before, I complained to the ICO last year re: Lloyds Tsb and also GE Money. Lloyds TSB had placed a default on my credit file in 2010, six years after the event, and GE Money were reporting that we were six payments in arrears each month, even though the account had been registered as a default in 2004, so should have automatically dropped off after six years. They had purchased it back from Link and thought it was ok to start reporting on it again.

 

Well, the ICO found in our favour on both complaints and he recommended that both entries be removed from the credit reference agencies, he said that GE were in breach of the DPA and also Lloyds. He said that when someone defaults on an account and is only able to make token payments, the default should be placed on that persons credit file there and then, regardless of whether they are making the token payments or not. It is not acceptable some years down the line to place a default then, as using the fairness test, the person who didn't pay at all is obviously in a better position than the person who did. I have to say, Lloyds have been a lot more helpful than GE Money, although having said that, Lloyds refused to remove the default when I initially wrote to them, stating that they were correct. Lloyds removed the default pretty quickly once they had received a letter from the ICO, but GE Money continued to report us as six payments in arrears and were coming up with all sorts of excuses, such as they had decided to close the account and write the balance off (which I hadn't asked them to do, makes not difference to me either way). I said that didn't prevent them informing the CRAs of their 'error' but they said they couldn't update the files until the account was officially shut down. The latest is that after informing them I would issue a court claim, they have updated the entry to show it is up to date, which, whilst an improvement on the 6 payments in arrears, is still not correct, and not what the ICO advised them to do, i.e, to remove the entry completely. I have now gone back to the ICO and he is going to offer further assistance in getting this sorted.

 

I have found the ICO to be really helpful, or at least the person who dealt with my complaints anyway. He has been really fair about everything, I thought he would automatically take the side of the banks, but he didn't, so was pleasantly surprised.

 

Anyway, hopefully, this will all be completely sorted soon, but GE money are really the most difficult company out, they know what they are doing and deliberately try to avoid doing what they have been told. One of the managers at GE even said that if they removed the entry it would seem as though there had never been any relationship between us, and so, they just can't do it. How ridiculous is that!

 

Hope anyone else having similar problems is getting on ok.

 

 

regards, Magda

Edited April 24, 2012 by MAGDA

[AndyOrch]

 

Anyway, hopefully, this will all be completely sorted soon, but GE money are really the most difficult company out, they know what they are doing and deliberately try to avoid doing what they have been told. One of the managers at GE even said that if they removed the entry it would seem as though there had never been any relationship between us, and so, they just can't do it. How ridiculous is that!

 

Awwww sad !!!!!! brings a tear to the eye

 

Well done Magda

 

Andy

[MAGDA]

Anyway, hopefully, this will all be completely sorted soon, but GE money are really the most difficult company out, they know what they are doing and deliberately try to avoid doing what they have been told. One of the managers at GE even said that if they removed the entry it would seem as though there had never been any relationship between us, and so, they just can't do it. How ridiculous is that!

 

Awwww sad !!!!!! brings a tear to the eye

 

Yes, It was a wonderful relationship (Not!) while it lasted, but ah well, just a distant memory now - they really must learn to move on....

 

Well done Magda

 

Thanks Andy, been a long haul, but seeing some light now...

 

Andy