What, if anything, are Experian admitting here?

[username44]

This was received today from Experian.

 

 

' With regards to =======, I would not disagree with the statement of their Customer Relations Officer. I don't believe that I claimed ======= were responsible for the entry appearing on your credit report or subsequently removing it.

 

I removed the entry from your credit report by entering a "disassociation" at your new address between your name and DOB and the other name and DOB. This helps our database differentiate between the two individuals with similar names but different dates of birth. We already have disassociations in place between you and the other individual at your previous address, but we need to enter a new disassociation if you change address. This is particularly important if the other individual with similar details moves to the address with you, whether temporarily or permanent.'

 

This was in response to an ongoing query as to how a family members credit data keeps appearing on another family members credit file. None of the data is good data and has caused a lot of distress financially, and destruction within the family.

 

Does this sound like Experian are admitting that the fault lies with them?

[username44]

Bit more background.

 

2011 several defaults were registered against family 1. None of them were his.

Experian + Equifax refused to do anything as the info was provided to them by the lenders.

Contacted all lenders who insisted on proof of ID, copy of reported account from CRA and they, finding that they had put info on the wrong person credit file told Experian & Equifax to remove the data. This took months.

Family 1 & 2 had an already strained relationship which exploded. 2 because he was embarrassed and ashamed. Family 1 because his life plans, financial, employment and living arrangements were severely disrupted because of his apparent bad credit.

Relationship still tender but all CRA's info repaired. Moved house together.

In April 2012 family 1 was refused bank account so he got a copy of his Experian file. There was new additional bad credit that again did not belong to him.

Thus the email.

We had been led to believe by the CRA's that the info was always provided by the lender and could only be changed or removed by the lender. This time, however the data was removed by Experian.

 

Where does family 1 stand with regards to compensation for the numerous defaults etc that he should never of had? All the cases I have read about were against the lenders? But it is starting to look like Experian is to blame for this.

 

I know this is complicated, made even more so when I'm writing as a third party, but any input would be appreciated.

[username44]

No takers on this? I will carry on updating just in case anybody drops by.

 

Today's letter is from Provident. In it they acknowledge that confirm that family 1 is not their customer and agree that his name has been wrongly linked to the debt. They have removed the details from his credit file (even though Experian has already done this) and state that he will no longer receive any correspondence from their solicitors.

 

They were asked to consider damages for this mistake but have not acknowledged this aspect of the initial complaint letter. This debt was the only adverse data on family 1's credit file. 5 missed payments so not good.

 

I haven't found any specific template for this avenue of claiming but am particularly interested in any info about Kpoharor v Woolwich Building Society 1995 and Durkin v DSG RETAIL LIMITED and HFC BANK PLC . I think I will hunt about a bit longer for info before writing the next letter (s).

 

Previously family 1 had over 10 defaults registered with Experian and Equifax which were not his, so I have several letters to write and want to get them spot on before posting.

[Benbane_Head]

Have a read of Section 13:

 

13 Compensation for failure to comply with certain requirements.

 

(1)An individual who suffers damage by reason of any contravention by a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to compensation from the data controller for that damage.

 

 

(2)An individual who suffers distress by reason of any contravention by a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to compensation from the data controller for that distress if—

 

 

(a)the individual also suffers damage by reason of the contravention, or

 

 

(b)the contravention relates to the processing of personal data for the special purposes.

 

 

(3)In proceedings brought against a person by virtue of this section it is a defence to prove that he had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to comply with the requirement concerned.

 

But also see if the DPA principles allow them a valid defence. It is in the schedules, but can't remember which one.

 

Then also consider any common law negligence if you think no valid defence can apply!!

[Benbane_Head]

Kpoharor v Woolwich Building Society 1995

 

Citation

(1995) Times, 8 December.

Hearing Date

08 December 1995

Court

Court of Appeal.

Judge

Evans and Waite LJJ, and Sir John May.

Summary

The issue arose whether a bank’s customer who was not a trader was entitled to recover substantial rather than nominal damages for loss of business reputation when his cheque was wrongly dishonoured by the bank. Held, the credit rating of an individual was as important for his personal transactions, including mortgages, hire purchase and banking facilities, as it was for a person engaged in trade. In either case there was a presumption of some injury when his cheque was dishonoured by his bank. In such circumstances, an individual could obtain substantial rather than nominal damages in contract for loss of business reputation. There was no binding authority for the proposition that substantial damages were only available if special facts were proved which were known by the bank when the contract was made.

[username44]

Thank you

Benbane_Head

 

I have to make dinner now ! I appreciate your input and will be back later to read and try to understand everything. : )

[Benbane_Head]

I sent you some info on the cases, but can't see them in my sent items? did you receive it?

[username44]

No Benbane_ Head. My inbox is empty. Please send again if you are still about. I'm going to get stuck into a weekend of legal considerations .

 

Thanks

[Benbane_Head]

I can't send PM's till I have 30 posts:( will need to do something else... Unless you want to give me your email address in which case I can re-send them to you.

 

Cheers!!

[username44]

Thanks

 

I don't really want to put my email on the board so I'm going to get to 30 posts and pm it to you

[username44]

Very interested to see your info Benbane head.

 

Nearly there lol

[Benbane_Head]

Will send them to you in the evening leaving work now....

[Benbane_Head]

just sent some stuff over by email.