How to remove a fake entry fabricated by a DCA from my credit report. Is the next step the IC?

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Over the last 6 years I have dealt with very many 'problem' entries on my credit reports, however, I have now found that one exists that is both false and blatantly a result of 'double-defaulting' by a DCA, but the CRA refuses to remove it.

 

I believe the next step is to involve the Information Commissioner (IC), however, I would like some feedback or suggestions from others on here as to whether I should do this now, or write once more to the CRA to request/demand that they do more than they have done so far. I am unsure whether this second approach would appear fairer if/when I then have to contact the IC. I also wondered whether there is a draft template on CAG that someone could suggest I could use.

 

To explain briefly, it would appear that I had a credit card which was defaulted in 09/2005 for just over £10,000 and would then have stayed my credit report until 09/2011. Other similar problem entries have come and gone over time and I expected this to follow the same pattern.

 

However, when I pulled my 3 reports in 11/2011, although that original credit card entry had by then disappeared, a report from one CRA showed an entry, started in 09/2005 for the same value and with a subsequent default date in 09/2010. This false entry would therefore stay on my account until 09/2016. The name of the DCA who had raised that entry in 09/2005 was the same DCA who have been chasing me for the credit card that was defaulted in 09/2005.

 

I have received correspondence from that particular DCA since 2005 and have always strongly denied that the original credit card account was mine. In every item of their correspondence, up to and including their most recent in 10/2011, they have always referred to the original credit card by name and quoted the corresponding 16 digit card no.

 

They have never once advised me that I have opened a new credit account with them (which I would obviously have known about!) and it therefore appears to me to be a case of being 'double-defaulted' for no other reason except to damage my credit rating.

 

When I wrote to the CRA to dispute this fake entry they replied with the usual stock answers of “ ... coy x has investigated .. no problems ... get in touch with DCA...”. Naturally the (false) information which I had disputed was going to be left unchanged (surprise, surprise).

 

So, do I write back to the CRA to rebuff the brush-off I have been given and if so what is the best way to do this?

 

Should I also write to the DCA to mandate them to prove their fake entry is actually valid? Perhaps I need to do this so that, if I subsequently write the the IC, I can show that I provided the DCA with an opportunity to correct the fake entry they placed upon my credit report.

 

Alternatively, should I now write to the IC to ask them to investigate and help to delete a false and unsubstiantated entry from my credit account.

 

Please note that I am NOT attempting to dispute an allegedly valid credit agreement but to have a double-defaulted entry removed from my credit record. I have dealt with most of my other credit related items now but have not previously come across such blatant fabrication.

 

BTW you guys on CAG have been great. Over the last 6 years I have dealt with 20+ different apparent debts and over 60 collection companies covering a total amount somewhere north of £70k and now this is the ONLY one left on my 3 credit reports, and it’s false! So if you too are being hassled by DCA's please believe me when I say, 'Stick with it. This stuff works.'

 

So, come on guys, how do I hit them where it hurts?

 

Thanks in advance

 

UpOverTheEyeballs

[silverfox1961]

Hi,

The CRAs are the DCAs best buddies, didn't you know The DCA say 'jump' and the CRA says 'How High'

 

When a CRA contacts a creditor regarding an entry, the creditor will tell them what to do. If the creditor does nothing and doesn't respond then the CRA can remove an entry but if the creditor tells them not to, they can't

 

Your next move should be to the DCA demanding either they prove the default is accurate or remove it

[dx100uk]

when was your last financial transaction?

 

dx

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Thanks silverfox1961 and dx100uk for the quick replies.

 

silverfox1961, it sounds like you are suggesting I treat it as if it is a 'normal' debt and I'm ok with that. This has the useful benefit of them having to provide full supporting evidence and if they don't then they would be hard pressed to support keeping the entry live on my record.

 

dx100uk, the account was defaulted in 09/2005. Subsequently, during 01~02/2006 I made 2 token payments whilst reviewing my affairs with my many creditors, and then in 03/2006 I sent the DCA a letter by recorded delivery repudiating any prior statements and re-affirmed the debt was not mine. That was the last financial transaction ever made against the original and unverified debt in question. Many letters have gone to and fro but nothing other than bluster and threats have eminated from them since then.

 

So to me the statute clock should be ticking from 09/2005 or 03/2006 and not certainly 09/2010 as it is at the moment.

Edited December 31, 2011 by UpOverTheEyeballs
missed out a word, whoops

[silverfox1961]

don't treat it as a normal debt. If this debt isn't yours you must state as much and remind them of their obligations under the updated debt collection guidance to be sure that the debtor they are chasing is the correct debtor.

If you can afford court action to make them comply tell them as much and if you can't tell them you will escalate this matter to the ICO and a report to them to the OFT for breaches to the guidelines

[dx100uk]

Thanks silverfox1961 and dx100uk for the quick replies.

 

silverfox1961, it sounds like you are suggesting I treat it as if it is a 'normal' debt and I'm ok with that. This has the useful benefit of them having to provide full supporting evidence and if they don't then they would be hard pressed to support keeping the entry live on my record.

 

dx100uk, the account was defaulted in 09/2005. Subsequently, during 01~02/2006 I made 2 token payments whilst reviewing my affairs with my many creditors, and then in 03/2006 I sent the DCA a letter by recorded delivery repudiating any prior statements and re-affirmed the debt was not mine. That was the last financial transaction ever made against the original and unverified debt in question. Many letters have gone to and fro but nothing other than bluster and threats have eminated from them since then.

 

So to me the statute clock should be ticking from 09/2005 or 03/2006 and not certainly 09/2010 as it is at the moment.

 

the sb clock ticks from your last financial transaction

so 6 yrs from then it should VANISH from your CRA file

regardless to ANY defaults they put on

that does not hold it open on the CRA file.

 

if the 'payments' were made under duress, they dont count either.

 

pers i'd ask the CRA WHY is this account still showing on your file - its been 6yrs since you last ack'ed it.

 

let THEM tell you WHY its still there

 

i bet they cant and they removed it.

 

dx

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

silverfox1961, what's the cost to take them to court if they refuse to remove it? I am currently on Income Support so that might reduce the fees charged.

 

dx100uk, yes, I take the 6 yrs to be wef 09/2005 and that was why I revoked any inference of liability by my holding payments.

 

So, taking both of your themes together, it would appear that I should write to the DCA and demand they explain why this false entry was created in 09/2005 and then defaulted in 2010.

[dx100uk]

why?

 

ask the cra the direct question

 

why is this account still showing as its statute barred?

 

if it goes..the defaults go too! end of problem

 

dx

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Mmm, dx100uk, that sounds reasonable. All they did was provide a standard answer which attempted to avoid any of the points I made regarding the new entry being based upon the first and only credit account.

 

Perhaps I should approach it from both directions:

 

Firstly a second letter to the CRA to restate the fact that the debt was by now statute barred and should not be reported against.

 

Secondly an initial letter to the DCA to request they remove this fake entry from my record.

 

No doubt both will be ignored, however, together they will lend weight to my argument if I need to take it further.

[dx100uk]

the cra cannot ignore you

 

they must provide you with the information you require

 

why is this account still showing on my CRA file?

 

if the ijfo they have is FALSE or INCORRECT

 

then they must remove the account forthwith

 

if they do.

 

then quite pers id be seeking compensation.

 

they should not be hold false info

 

dx

[Guest]

some info re defaults for eg

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?323570-Default-Info

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Not wishing to ''jump in'' but there

are are a couple of points that may

be of interest ::

If a debt becomes stat barred BEFORE the defaults

6 years is up it will remain on file until the 6 years.

are up, the two are totally divorced in most cases.

Unless the debtor has informed the creditor in

writing that the debt is SB and they will not be paying

then it still exists ( is does anyway but cannot be enforced in court)

all other collection activity can continue, the OFT Guidance

states they consider it unfair to pursue after the debtor

has so notified the creditor, with the ''warning'' that to continue

MAY constitute harassment.

 

With this the bar calls:madgrin:

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Thanks BRIGADIER2JCS, I feel two letters, to the CRA and DCA highlighting the statuted barred position re the original alleged debt and thus the fabricated status of the current entry are required.

 

All subsequent chasing would be harrassment ( as you mention ) and to not remove the fabricated entry ( unless they can somehow prove it is correct, which it isn't ) would lead them to be liable for an action for compensation.

 

As it stands, I do have another credit card now, however, it carries a high interest rate and there's the distinct probabilty that if I hadn't had this fake entry on my CRA for the last few years I could have obtained a lower interest rate. On this train of thought, how does one put together a financial value when seeking compensation?

[dx100uk]

a default does not hold the account on the cra file till its 6th birthday.

else if that were the case a dca could just keep sending defaults every 5yrs 11mts!!

 

dx

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Ford, thank you for your post. I downloaded the 2 pdfs.

 

I noted that in "Guidance on defaults" on p19 para 53 the final sentence reads, "The purchase should not affect how long the record is kept. It should be removed six years after the default."

 

So by their rules double defaulting a debt simply because it was purchased is inappropriate behaviour.

 

Thanks for the link

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Just simply not allowed, ONE DEBT ONE DEFAULT

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Thank you all for your input.

 

I have drafted a Letter Before Action which will be posted by recorded delivery to the MD of the DCA on 3/1/2012.

 

I will place an update on this topic once I hear back from them.

 

Rgds all

Edited January 3, 2012 by UpOverTheEyeballs

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Posted today, sit rep to follow ...

[InformedSearcher]

I might add that DCA's are amazing at ensuring you are never forgotten by CRA's! This is one of those times when after a statute barred debt they'll continue to show searches with the explanation, 'Outstanding Debt'.

 

A CRA will NOT want to listen to you because in their eyes you are merely an entry on a file. I've had to personally, more than once had to go to the ICO with my complaint of this. As the ICO can take up to a year to do anything, once they have issued the instruction that the entries have to be removed your 6 years can easily become 7 or 8 or more. Remember that these entries stay on for a year so many a time new entries have appeared when the order to remove previous ones is reeived.

 

A potential creditor will also look at the searches and possibly consider numerous 'outstanding debt' entries as adequate for them not dealing with you further. The viscous circle then starts again.

 

Michael

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I deal with a large anount of CRA problems and often find that the data subject is at fault on many occasions,

especially on the question of defaulted debts becoming SB,

 

if the default has time to ''run'' it will remain on file SB or not,

 

so many debtors do not properly inform creditors that debt are statute barred in writting

and clearly state that will not be paying,

 

thus the creditor/DCA is still able to press for payment but cannot enforce the debt in court.

 

If a debtor wishes to challenge an entry on their files it is important firstly to contact the organisation that has placed the entry NOT the CRA,

just send a copy of your complaint to the CRA to inform them that you are challenging the entry and require a notice of dispute registered on the entry.

 

Follow this it is logical, simple and it works.

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Sit rep as follows. False entry to be removed. Result! Their letter was dated 2 days after my 14 day Letter Before Action was posted so it is clear they fully understood the position they were in.

 

I will be sending a copy of their letter to the CRA in question and will ask them to confirm the entry is deleted, after all, it would be terrible if the DCA 'forgot' to do what they said they would do

 

Amended copy of their letter is attached for ref.

 

Thanks again guys; if I had gone with my first plan I would have written to the Information Commissioner and from what I have read that could have taken months or years, certainly not just TWO days.

 

Thanks again

 

[rebel11]

Attachments unapproved.

[dx100uk]

scan the required letters/agreements/sheets

as a picture[jpg] file

remove all pers info inc barcodes etc using paint program

but leave all figures and dates.

 

goto one of the many free online pdf converter websites

it would be better to upload a multipage pdf

than many single ones

or if you have PDF as an installed printer drive use that

or use word and save as pdf

open a new msg box here

hit go advanced below the msg box

hit manage attachments below that box

hit the add files button on the top right

hit select files, navigate to your file on your pc

hit upload files

NB:you can set where it goes in the post by hitting insert inline.

then hit reply button

dx

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Thanks rebel and dx100uk for your quick replies and assistance.

 

New attachment coming.

 

Rgds

[UpOverTheEyeballs]

Thanks for the tips. In the end I went with the pdf route.

 

A nice letter for a Saturday morning, don't you think?

 

 

 

StatuteBarred.pdfattached

Edited January 7, 2012 by UpOverTheEyeballs