Damage to "Good character" compensation.

[Rodders59]

Hi All.

 

I read some time ago here that when a dca bad credit references you whilst an account is in dispute, thay are committing an offence. Furthermore that there has been a test case that the debtor is entitled to £1000 compensation, without having to prove anything other than the referencing entry.

 

Could some kind knowledgeable soul here point me to the thread and the case reference. I need to file my counterclaim against Lowell by 18-09-12.

 

Any help appreciated.

 

Thanks

Edited September 12, 2012 by Rodders59
Typo's

[dpick]

Hi the experts will be along soon but to my belief if an account is in dispute then they can still do anything short of court proceedings to try to enforce the debt, letters, defaults etc. Some of the ****-bags have tried court and on occasion been brought up short though.

 

dpick

[Rodders59]

Many thanks dpick. I have seen here in the past a post referring to my original request but can't find it now, hence request.

[citizenB]

Do a search for "Durkin" - I think that is the case you are looking for.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi All.

 

I read some time ago here that when a dca bad credit references you whilst an account is in dispute, thay are committing an offence. Furthermore that there has been a test case that the debtor is entitled to £1000 compensation, without having to prove anything other than the referencing entry.

 

Could some kind knowledgeable soul here point me to the thread and the case reference. I need to file my counterclaim against Lowell by 18-09-12.

 

Any help appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

What do you mean by bad credit referencing, default entries, late payment markers, missed payment markers, all of which will have been placed by the OC.

 

The ICO Technical Guidance (version 3 02/08/20070 Section 29) States:

When in Collection:

When debts are passed to internal OR external debt collection departents or agents, the LENDER is responsible for keeping the record of a default and any OS balance accurate,this appliies to debts assigned for collection only.

Sections 52-54 apply to debts which sold with the rights to a 3rd party, the lender has to make sure the rcords with the CRA are accurate and up to date and adequate,if they want the about the debt to continue on CRA files they will need to come to an agreement with the ourchaser about who is to be respnsible for this.

IF the purchaser agrees to take control of the record, the custmer should be told that the dbt has been sold and to whom.

The CRA file entry should be changed to show the name of the purchaser and the rights to the debt have been sold ir assigned.

 

The purchaser should then make sure the record is up to date including changes to the amount owed,The purchase should NOT affect how long the debt is kept on the record.

It should be removed 6 years after the default.

54. Where the purchaser of the debt does not agree to take the responsibility /control of the record the original lender and at least in part, will remain responsible if the original record is kept on file.

When the debt is sold or assigned, the customer will no longer owe any money to the lender. IF the record is not removed, the sale or assignment should be recorded and the balance shown as zero, the customer should still be told who the debt has been sold or assigned to;

 

The most common argument about CRAs and DCAs is about the DCA making searches on the various tables on the record the regulators agree that such searches are part of the record and also mention that the number and/or frequency of such searches should be reasonable.

[spartathisis]

Durkin thread here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?264189-Default-damages-PCWorld-wrong-laptop-sold-amp-HFC-Finance-Supreme-Court&p=3978080#post3978080