Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Bankfodder thank you for your interest and your comments.   There are issues with ground rents AND service charges. In my case, non residential, not eligeable for Tier 1 tribunal so there is no possibility of holding the leaseholder to account for unreasonable service charges because of the loophole below. Even if it is residential see Richard Barclay and others quoted in the article above. You win the case about unreasonable costs yet have to pay the leaseholders court fees for loosing their case! Criminal!!!   From the article I quoted above.  'The Times reported that last year leasehold owner Richard Barclay successfully recovered £1,200 of a £10,100 service charge from the management company in respect of his central London Flat. But the victory soon turned sour when Barclay was hit with a bill for £61,300 in legal fees by Quadrant Property Management who takes care of the building.   The loophole is contained in the majority of leases which typically allow freeholders to recoup their legal costs from leaseholders, even if the freeholder loses the case. There is no parallel right for leaseholders to claim costs back.    
    • The online retailer wants to buy the brands, not their shops, suggesting any deal would cost jobs. View the full article
    • I have gone through nearly the whole sar return, it is very large. I am confident to say there is no mention of a default notice within it. 
    • Change Zoom to Online as Zoom is only one platform, and they might use another, it has become the accepted terminology, but best not to refer to a specific platform.  Otherwise looks good The rteal devil of Simon's claim is that he is trying to imply a contract that depends on a Prohibition for Consideration, And its one sided as the person he is binding has no benefit from the contract, apart from paying £100 for the privilege of stopping however briefly.  a nanosecond, a minute 30 minutes kerching that'll be £100 or else.  Simon has also invoiced cars stopped at a Zebra crossing with people crossing at an airport.
    • When she rang BT did she just "mention" about cancelling her Bb contract or did she actually tell them to cancel it?   I've just renegotiated my Bb contract with BT (I know they're useless but I can't be bothered doing too much work to look at any other provider) and I've managed to save money plus they are meant to record 'phone calls and I know (because I spoke to several different call handlers over two weeks) thatthey take very accurate notes of their conversations with customers.   She needs to find out if she actually did cancel the contract.  (I'm sure others will suggest doing a SAR).   Also what sort of contract did she have with BT?  Presumably it included Bb, mobile phone and Sky?  If the contract had just renewed, BT should have emailed her confirming contract details including duration, how to cancel and cancelation fees.  They've just done this for me for the contract I renegotiated two days ago.   EDIT:  It's not clear, but are you saying she's been charged £800 cancelation for Bb or are you saying shae hasn't paid them £800 she owes on her phone?   She ought to be able to look at her BT account online to see what she owes and how her bills are made up.  
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

HELP with getting default dates changed or gone


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2755 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi, These ''inconsistencies'' of reporting procedures do cause a lot of problems.

So to answer your questions, the Information Commissioners Offices' Trchnical Guidance on Defaults state that defaults ''should usually'' be placed within 6 months of the date of the cause of action, generally taken as being after 3 missed payments or a ''history '' of late/missed payments again usually within 6 months, so imo

defaulting 4 years in to a DMP is unreasonable and unfair and should be subject to a complaint to the ICO together a formal complaint to the data controller of CITI.

 

I can offer to help you with these complaints if needed.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi, Thanks so much for your reply, I do think that it is unfair and I am hoping that by putting in these complaints I can have it removed. Looking at the online complaint form for the ICO, would I write full details of my complaint in the body of my email to them as the form does not appear to have space for this. Also would you suggest CITI are the people I need to be writing to rather than OPUS, since CITI were the ones that defaulted me. Any help in relation to what to say will be appreciated. Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok will put something together for you later.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

i sent out a nice letter today to all creditors expressing that it has now been over 38 days since i wrote and that i shall wait 8 weeks in total before taking the case to the ombudsman ico etc, i have now received a letter from fremans today saying

 

dear miss

with regard to my previous letter of the 4th march 2013 and with regard to your letter received on the 26th february the content of which has been noted.

whilst i sympathise with your situation a default is applied to an account when it is referred to an external recovery agency. Your account was transferred to EOS solutions on the 10th july 2011 and a default was registered on your credit file to reflect this on the 11th july 2011. We accepted reduced instalmenst from you for a considerable amount of time to try and assist you with your financial difficulties. The default date bears no connection to when you approached a debt management company to assist with your affairs. With regard to your comments that other creditors issued a default in 2007 in accordance with the ICO guidelines. If this has been the case with other creditors this would imply that the accounts in question with other creditors were reffered to an external recovery company back in 2007.

Records are retained for a period of six years from when an account closes or defaults. This retention period is standard practice throughout the credit industry and is also our owncompany policy. It is a factual record of how the account has been conducted. The default date 11th july 2011 will remain on file.

i trust this resolves your enquiry and clarifies the position

yours sincerly

 

Need advice on what i can do next on this one as im not giving up without a fight, what would you suggest please

many thanks :-)

Stand up for the little man !

 

Dont take no for a final answer until every nook and cranny has been explored :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

i sent out a nice letter today to all creditors expressing that it has now been over 38 days since i wrote and that i shall wait 8 weeks in total before taking the case to the Ombudsman ico etc, i have now received a letter from fremans today saying

 

dear miss

with regard to my previous letter of the 4th march 2013 and with regard to your letter received on the 26th february the content of which has been noted.

whilst i sympathise with your situation a default is applied to an account when it is referred to an external recovery agency. Your account was transferred to EOS solutions on the 10th july 2011 and a default was registered on your credit file to reflect this on the 11th july 2011. We accepted reduced instalmenst from you for a considerable amount of time to try and assist you with your financial difficulties. The default date bears no connection to when you approached a debt management company to assist with your affairs. With regard to your comments that other creditors issued a default in 2007 in accordance with the ICO guidelines. If this has been the case with other creditors this would imply that the accounts in question with other creditors were reffered to an external recovery company back in 2007.

Records are retained for a period of six years from when an account closes or defaults. This retention period is standard practice throughout the credit industry and is also our owncompany policy. It is a factual record of how the account has been conducted. The default date 11th july 2011 will remain on file.

i trust this resolves your enquiry and clarifies the position

yours sincerly

 

Need advice on what i can do next on this one as im not giving up without a fight, what would you suggest please

many thanks

Stand up for the little man !

 

Dont take no for a final answer until every nook and cranny has been explored :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the letter you have received is their ''final response'' so you can complain to FOS now.

Edited by BRIGADIER2JCS

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okey dokey I shall get a letter typed up to the fos for this one then many thanks

Still waiting to hear from the other creditors m

Stand up for the little man !

 

Dont take no for a final answer until every nook and cranny has been explored :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the complaint should be to the information commissioner's office and it will help if you point out exactly why Freemans have been unfair.

I'm a bit pushed for time at the moment but a search on the ICO website should drag up the document you need. If not, give me a few days and I'll find it for you.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reallymadwoman that would be a great help if you could find it for me as I'm not sure what or where to look I appreciate the help thankyou :-)

Stand up for the little man !

 

Dont take no for a final answer until every nook and cranny has been explored :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the document you need to refer to on the ICO website http://www.ico.org.uk/for_organisations/sector_guides/~/media/documents/library/Data_Protection/Detailed_specialist_guides/default_tgn_version_v3%20%20doc.ashx

and this is the link on how to make a complaint

http://www.ico.org.uk/complaints/handling/complain

 

What you are complaining about is that Freemans have not followed the ICO guidance which states (on page 11 I think, but check yourself) that defaults should be placed AT THE LATEST 6 months after the last FULL contractual payment is made. In plain English, they could have put the default on your file as soon as reduced payments were agreed and should have done it within 6 months. As they didn't you have been disadvantaged because the default will be on your credit file for longer.

 

In my experience the ICO are pretty good at dealing with these sorts of complaints and will tell Freemans to remove the default fairly promptly.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The guidance state ''SHOULD'' be placed ''usually'' with in 6 months of the cause of action, but there are some exceptions.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Copy in the FOS with the details of the mismanagement of data it may help IF the matter then has to go to FOS at any time.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an update in relation to my dealings with OPUS and their 4 years too late default, after disputing it through equifax (without sucess) and writing to them requesting they amend the default date to 4 years earlier, Opus have now decided to move the default notices forward by over 2 months?!! and also amend every months update on my credit reports over the last 6 years, changing the red and green boxes, chaningthe numbers from 6 to 4 etc etc..... on EVERY month, year on year! the good news is, I printed a copy of my report prior to dispute and now I have a print out of all the changes they have made - which to me can only look like they are trying to interfere or manipulate the data. Considering in their response to my dispute on equifax, they stated that they only had limited account history for my account since they took it over from CITI, so they can only assume that the default date should stay as it is! So how they have managed to assume all this data and amend it all, I do not know. Just don't know how they are playing this, or what they are upto (other then giving me adverse credit rating for 2 months longer). I have submitted a complaint through DCO from your advice, and I am still awaiting a case officer to be assigned to it. Just wondering is this a normal way for creditors to react by making my credit file look even worse? Best wishes and luck to all and I will keep you all in the loop re DCO complaint. x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well IMO I would say you have a very good case to sue them for defamation.

 

I would send Equifax a letter before action and the same to OPUS instructing them that they have 7 days in which to correct this data, and failure to do so WILL result in you suing them for defamation in court.

 

Incorrect data on YOUR credit file, attracts a four figure compo figure. However, you must only threaten them with legal action if you are prepared to carry it out, otherwise it will make it harder for others who do choose to go down this route.

  • Confused 1

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree BUT if you threaten legal action you MUST be prepared to follow through!!

  • Confused 1

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks you two for your replies, its reassuring to get some good advice from those in the know! I certainly feel confident enough to take it as far as court, but should I not wait for the DCO complaint to go through and see what result I get from that first (as it would the courts prefer to hear their findings), or is it common practice to start proceedings prior? Is it just the small claims court that I would be requesting the summons from? I take full responsibility for the mess I got myself into at the beginning of 2006, but no one should have to live with the punishment over the 6 years, its so cruel. x

Link to post
Share on other sites

By DCO do you mean the ICO, (Information Commissioner)

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is entirely up to you, but the ICO may have a back log of complaints to deal with, so if you hit the CRA and OPUS with your LBA giving them 7 days to correct the data, they will either do so, or you will then need to submit a claim via the small claims track for damages due to defamation.

 

Have you been refused any credit or mobile phone contracts? Mortgage a Job even? The latter would attract a heavier fine for them as you will have been seriously disadvantaged by this incorrect data.

 

They will either remove the incorrect info, and replace it with the correct version, in which case you would just let the ICO carry on with their investigation, or if they fail to correct it, you take them to court, sue them, win, and they are ordered to correct the info, and the ICO can be informed that their is no need for them to continue with their investigation.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well just had a phone call from Lloyds tsb about my complaint saying they understand where I am coming from but they are standing firm and not changing the date, I asked him to put it all in writing to me. He said I can then go to the fos with a complaint if I wish to do so!! Oooooo they make me so mad :-(

Again can I ask fos or ico ?

Stand up for the little man !

 

Dont take no for a final answer until every nook and cranny has been explored :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also just been digging thru Lloyds papers and found two defaults from them, one dated 11 April 2012 and one dated 11th may 2012. I thought they could only send one ? Any advice pls

Stand up for the little man !

 

Dont take no for a final answer until every nook and cranny has been explored :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Default notices are just that notice of ''what will/may happen'' if the cause of the default is not remedied.

So it seems Lloyds did not place a default after the 1st notice was sent.

 

Get a final response letter from them, the complain to FOS copied to the ICO.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes get this immature response in writing and take them to the cleaners, silly bank, how quickly they forget we bailed their criminal backsides out of their mess!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...