Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I am going to try and explaine in full details from start to present and see if you have any advice for me on what i can do.   on 15/1/2021 16:25pm i was traveling along hazlebarrow Road wich is on my estate at around 30mph, its a tight road with cars parked along the left hand side, as i proceeded through, a van ( which was parked on my left hand side, facing towards me) pulled out from the side of the road, he stopped the van wich resulted in the van being at an angled stationary position on the road. I breaked immediately but the ice and snow skidded my tyers, i skidded into the drivers side of his van, my car bounced off his van and sent my vehicle head first into the back of a parked car ( wich was originally parked at the back of the van before he set off from the side of the road. I will refer to the van driver as MR S. ( im going to attatch a street view picture and diagram which will be more helpful in understanding how the accident accured ect) .    The owner of the parked car, which i will refer to as Mr T came out of his house. Myself, mr S and mr T exchanged details and took photos, then i left the scene as my first concern, understandably was to contact my midwife and the hospital. I live just round the corner from the scene of the accident so i slowly drove my car to my property.   I contacted Go skippy the next day 16/1/21 and informed them of the accident and gave them all the details ect.   by the following monday 18/1/21 i had a call from AX who said they was dealing with my claim as go skippy will not deal with it as i am third party insured. Over the next few days, i complied with their requests ( gave them a written statment of what happened, sent them pictures of the damage to my vehicle and MR S van ect).   Then on the 19/1/21 AX contacted me again and asked if i need a curtesy vehicle, my first response was ' how much will that cost me?' Of which she replied ' nothing because your insurance covers the cost'. I agreed to the curtesy vehicle and the vehicle was delivered to me on the 20/1/21.    Over the coming weeks, AX and i had regular contact about my claim and updated me in regards to my own vehicle. At one point she said it could be deemed a 50/50 liability.   An engineer had collected my car, deemed in a total loss as the damage was more than 66% of its total value and written my car off . i had a call from a lady from AX and she said they have valued the car and i will be payed out £2200 . i asked when and she said ' we will send you a cheque out for £358 in the post, and the remaining balance will be payed out by Admirel but this may take a few weeks more' .    I didnt hear nothing for around 2 weeks so i contacted AX again for an update, she told me that admirel are refusing liability and there now in dispute. Every time i contacted them they said the same thing ' admirel are refusing liability'.   i asked them why admirel consider them not liable and she read from the notes ' MR S said he was driving along the road, the corsa ( my vehicle) was at high speed coming towards me , i beeped my horn and tried moving out of the way but i couldnt because of the ice and the snow and the corsa hit my van' ( complete lie!!)   The lady at AX said the problem is that the damage to both our vehicles is consistant with both our stories and due to there being no witnesses, no cctv or dash cam footage- no one can prove who is at fault.   I then questioned why i had been told i was being paid out £2200 and she said 'well we have to advice you the estimated value' of which i replied 'no, there was no 'advice' - i was told it was a done deal i was getting paid £2200 and she told me i had a cheque arriving in the post!!!.    The lady then told me she had requested a ' none prejudice payment' from admirel and waiting for a response.     Shortly after this phone call, AX contacted me again and asked if i had the funds to repair my own vehicle or buy another one, ( im.assuming admirel refused to pay the  none prejudice payment).   I told them No i do not as i have a baby due and even if i did have the funds, why on earth would i fork out to repair my own vehicle when i wasnt at fault ?! . she said ok im going to pass this to managment and see what we can do .     I contacted AX again and asked for an update and expressed how unhappy i was with their service as i felt like they hadnt fought my corner, bowed down to admirel and then had the cheek to ask me to repair my own vehicle . Again she said ' its still in dispute, admirel are not budging i have to pass this on to management.   She then asked me for 3 months bank statements to 'prove' i dont have the funds to repair my vehicle myself. I thought this was ridiculous and stated that even if i had the funds, why would i repair my own vehicle when im.not at fault!?   Obviously this has been on going since middle of january, pretty fed up. My brother come to this forum last night to seek advice And had a couple of replies that i may be liable to pay for the hire car costs.   I contacted AX first thing this morning regarding this. I made it clear that they can collect the vehicle to stop the daily charges as i do not want to be in thousands of pounds worth of debt when i am a lone parent with a new born baby. the lady told me ' we will try every avenue to recover the cost from Admirel for the hire car charges, if this means taking them to court, even if this is unsuccessful, considering you comply with your hire vehicle contract and you work with us with your claim ( which you have been doing) you will not be liable for this debt and if worst comes to worst and admirel will not pay, we will just wipe the debt off' .   i made her repeat several times that i will not be liable for this debt and she said i have told you my name, and these calls are recordered and i am telling you that this debt will not be on you to pay . She then said that if i was to give AX the hire car back now, then it would jepordise everything. And she said ' we gave you that hire vehicle because we beleive your not at fault so you can keep using it as we know you need transport'   I then questioned the need for bank statements again and she told me the reason they need bank statements is so if it goes to court - AX can justify why i needed the hire car for so long ( because i dont have the funds to repair my vehicle or buy another one) and also so they can prove they have tried every root possible.      After the phonecall it got me thinking about how she said ' aslong as you comply with your hire car contract your not liable for any charges for the hire car' .   Will they find any fault with the contract just to try and lumber me with the debt? As it seems pretty fishy how they would just ' wipe off' thousands of pounds if admirel refuse to pay.    And also, she said if i gave the hire car back it would jepodise the case . so when the lady rang me the other week asking if i had funds to repair or buy myself a new vehicle , if i had said yes, ill buy a car tomorrow and come collect the curtesy one. Then what? Wouldnt that ' jepodise' the case?      As you can imagaine, my heads spinning. Stressed and dont know what to do. I dont even care about a pay out , i just want to give the hire car back and be completely done with AX . but now im scared if i give the car back i will be lumbered with thousand of pounds worth of debt from the hire car charges.    What can/should i do?    Thank you Gemma
    • Hi Ade,   Stop speaking to them by phone and keep contact in writing only, which you've said you prefer.   Send TT a SAR by post immediately. The data you get back should enable you to see what they think you owe, and how it's made up.   Also write to BW Legal confirming you dispute the alleged debt owed to TT and have written to TT seeking data, so BWL must stop demands until TT have replied to the SAR you've sent them.
    • Please do although obviously I don’t know the facts from your side but at least I can tell you how much of a cut and paste job it is.
    • Please check back for a full reply tomorrow. However, it would help if you would introduce pergo spaces into a story full stop it's very long and especially for people with small screens it's very difficult to follow when it is so compacted.   I think this straight has become rather confused because of the third party account which we received at the outset. I think it will probably be helpful if you could repost your story but on a new thread and more openly spaced please.   Then we can start to have a closer look at it. However, as I've already suggested, I think there are two issues. The question of your liability in the accident and the problem of how you have been persuaded to take a rental car at such a high rate.    I would suggest that you hold off telephoneing anyone until we have had a closer look.before you do anything on the telephone. You have obviously had some very important conversations but you don't have any evidence of them. Although the other side may say that they have recorded them, you you may find it difficult to get hold of those recordings if in fact those recordings incriminate them in any way. for instance if they have promised you that you don't have to pay anything for the hire car, that would be an extremely useful conversation to have but you may find that it is difficult to get hold of.   please start a new thread it will be much easier to continue from there                                
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • 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
      • 33 replies
  • Recommended Topics

HELP with getting default dates changed or gone


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2795 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...