Cap1 & CCA return

[Guest The Terminator]

Surely they should take all reasonable precautions to ensure their target audience are within the acceptable age bracket. We have strict laws on this with TV and films - what's the difference? Responsibility cannot be placed with the viewer.

 

Exactly so why are MBUSA advertising on TV before the 9.00 watershed

[un1boy]

He was on MSN when Capital 1 popped up.

 

You see, I think that is irresponsible advertising by the lender; eveyone knows that children use MSN and it is not possible to distinguish the age of the person usinng it.

 

If he had been on say a credit card comparison website, that would be different, but MSN?

[un1boy]

Under the defs of the CCA I don't think so, but it's worth a discussion because I think they should have to

 

I don't think the cca's are regulated by the cca, isn't it the Data Protection Act they answer to.

Anyway don't the only hold info sent to them by the creditor and registry on defaults ccjs etd they don't have access completete agreements.

 

Peter

 

Ah, I know - but I am having discussions with the CRA's to the tune of, "well if you can't provide a copy of any alleged agreements or terms that I am meant to have agreed to then surely the information you hold is defamatory/incorrect and you must have a responsbility to make sure that the informaiton help is correct."

 

Both the major ones have failed to supply me copies of anything, nor ahve any of the original lenders, so surely they must realise that they are holding our data unlawfully.

 

I know they are in between a rock and a hard place though, because they either remove the data at my request and risk breaching the contract they hold with the lenders, or risk having legal actio taken against them by the consumer.....

 

Would the CRAs have to supply a copy of any contracts they hold with lenders that mean they profit out of our data? So would a Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) work?

 

I mean, if they have to disclose everything relating to us then we must be some sort of clause (either explicity or generally) in a contract they have with the lenders.

 

Any thoughts?

[TideTurner]

un1boy, you MUST request confirmation or a 'Certificate of Destruction' dated and signed which you can refer to if your information crops up at a later date.

[un1boy]

un1boy, you MUST request confirmation or a 'Certificate of Destruction' dated and signed which you can refer to if your information crops up at a later date.

 

TideTurner, thanks for that info - You mean when I get all my info removed from the CRAs?

 

I have never heard of a certificate of destruction.

[Peterbard]

My understanding is that when you sign your contract with the creditor you give them the right to share data on certain aspects relating to how the account is maintained,notice of any defaults date account open etc.

The bone of contention has always been that the creditors continue to provide this information or the cra's hold onto this data long after your consent has expired (at the end of your contract).

I do not think that the CRA ever have acces to the complete agreement.

 

Peter

[un1boy]

I am aware of this Peter, but my contention is that when you have told them the informaiton is held unlawfully or is incirrect, I don't see that it is sufficient for the CRA to say, "well the original creditor says it's right, so i is" they should at that point have to obtian evidence to make sure that they are holding true and acurate data as per the requirements of the DPA - and they are, afterall Data Controllers.

 

Don't forget that these same lenders that they have to have permission from are the ones that pay them obscene amounts of money to use!!

[TideTurner]

This document comes in many forms and may be a simple confirmation that your information has been deleted, or if held physically has been destroyed, and the method of destruction.

 

I have been successful with two DCA's on this and have produced a flow chart which I intend to show to the Court which has details of the 'lines of communication'. Once you have made your SAR (and objected to its lack of content) it is easy to show who has talked to who.

 

When you have a confirmation from everybody who has your information that it has been destroyed or removed, it is easy to determine who is providing your information unlawfully.

 

I intend to place the responsibility of this task on those who provided it (the Bank).

 

I am fortunate enough to have worked in IT and been very careful with my info.

 

Once you know an organisation has your info, immediately question their rights to store or process it, and demand its destruction / deletion, and methods used for this, together with proof or confirmation of its cessation.

[un1boy]

ok, that's great, I will keep it in mind, thanks!!

[Peterbard]

The DPA is not one of my strong points but i was under the impression that the Data controler at the source ie the creditor was responsible for giving the correct data to the cra.

That is who I have been refered to when i have queried an incorrect default on my record.

Is this the section you frefered to Tide Turner.

14. - (1) If a court is satisfied on the application of a data subject that personal data of which the applicant is the subject are inaccurate, the court may order the data controller to rectify, block, erase or destroy those data and any other personal data in respect of which he is the data controller and which contain an expression of opinion which appears to the court to be based on the inaccurate data.

 

Peter

[un1boy]

But The CRAs are Data Controllers in their own right Peter, so they have all the same responsibilties that the "orginal" data controllers have too!

[Peterbard]

I am aware of this Peter, but my contention is that when you have told them the informaiton is held unlawfully or is incirrect, I don't see that it is sufficient for the CRA to say, "well the original creditor says it's right, so i is"

 

In My experiance that is exactly what the do say, which is why you have to contact the Data controler at the bank.

 

THis is what i have done successfully with both Barclays and the Nat Wewst in both cases getting my defaults removed.

Have I missed a short cut.

would like to see that diagram of your TT

Cheers

Peter

[un1boy]

I agree and understand Peter but I am currently putting together an argument for the CRAs to test this theory - I think they are jsut selling out, hoping that we will challenge the original lenders so that if they tell the CRAs to remove the data then the CRA hasnt breached their contract.

 

I think it's about time the CRAs finally accepted responsibility for the information the hold.

 

I will let you know how this turns out if you like?

 

I wuold be interested to see your diagram TT!!

[Peterbard]

But The CRAs are Data Controllers in their own right Peter, so they have all the same responsibilties that the "orginal" data controllers have too!

 

Please don't think i am trying to start an argument this is a learning experiance for me but isn't the only Data controler at the Bank the one with all the information(The agreement) .The cra only gets the data that your consent on the contract or the Data Prtection Act allows him to pass on.

 

Cheers

Peter

[TideTurner]

Peter, can you PM me with you email address, I can't paste it.

[Guest The Terminator]

I have a very hypothetical question which relates to the CCA.When does an "extortinate credit bargin" arise.For example Mr X has a Barclayshark card with an APR of 17%.Now Mr X goes out and spends £1000 and only pays the minimum amount each month its going to take him at least 15 years plus to pay it back.Now if we have got a mathamatican on the forum could he/she work this out bearing in mind one of the card providers tatics is to calculate the interest from different dates.

[meagain]

Isn't a calculation of that supposed to appear in the agreement somewhere?

[JonCris]

But The CRAs are Data Controllers in their own right Peter, so they have all the same responsibilties that the "orginal" data controllers have too!

 

Of course they do un1boy but according to them when asked they rely on their clients supplying correct info & they have no control or means of checking. Rubbish I say. They aren't exempt for the law they have an equal obligation under the law..

 

At some point in the not too distant future I see consumers litigating against them as they are now the money lenders

[meagain]

30 minutes and a quick hack later, £1000 on a card at 17.9%, all purchases, no promotion, no interest free period (because the balance isn't paid off in full), 2.75% minimum payment with £5 floor gives me 182 months to clear. 181 months if you allow an exception to the "minimum payment only" rule to clear the entire balance of £5.11 in the final month. I personally think that when the base rate is 5%, 17.9% is extortionate for long-term credit.

[Guest The Terminator]

30 minutes and a quick hack later, £1000 on a card at 17.9%, all purchases, no promotion, no interest free period (because the balance isn't paid off in full), 2.75% minimum payment with £5 floor gives me 182 months to clear. 181 months if you allow an exception to the "minimum payment only" rule to clear the entire balance of £5.11 in the final month. I personally think that when the base rate is 5%, 17.9% is extortionate for long-term credit.

 

Thanks Meagain: I estimated 15 years and that was at 17%.I agree with you entirely 17.9% is extortionate when the base rate is only 5%.I noted that Crapitall 1 are doing a card at 34%APR which I personally think is well over the top.

[JonCris]

Of course they are & because our wonderful regulators have stated that they won't cap such deals they now believe they have free reign to charge what they like. Provi 1,200%

 

Cap are covering themselves for the cost of refunds

 

They actualy said that to do so would mean the poor & disadvantaged would not have access to lending!

 

Do you think they know the meaning of irony

[un1boy]

So, is there provision in the CCA for lenders to not lend extortionately?

 

Is this being tested at the moment?

[Guest The Terminator]

So, is there provision in the CCA for lenders to not lend extortionately?

 

Is this being tested at the moment?

 

There is provision in the CCA but for a better understanding read Wilson vs First County Trust(2001) this is case law and explains it all.

 

Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 633 (2 May 2001)

[Peterbard]

Hi UB

Look At Setion139(1) and particularily 171(7) of the cca

 

Peter

[un1boy]

Cheers guys- I'll check it all over later when I've got more time.