Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you need to ring northants bulk and ask for a copy of the judgement and the claimform by email pdf. it is quite usual for them to not have a copy of the claimform. so you need to record the call and ask them to read out the particulars of claim and the address it was sent too.     old wives tales , if you have a debt owing that shows on your credit file or you know exists from say the last 7yrs you should NEVER move without WRITTING to the debt owner with your new address. never run from debt which falls within the above .     all mortgage style SLC loans that were not deferred with erudio following the gov't sale in 2013 and that did not have a court claim raised within 6yrs are SB'd.   drydens simply did this because they wrote to your old address, got no response, and knew they'd get a default roboclaim CCJ where no human checks anything.   shot yourself in the foot.      
    • yep.   if all these are still owned/with the original creditors and you are not paying any powerless DCA's  then little point in any CCA requests at this stage unless any (non OD A/C's) are say pre 2000 opening.   our pro rata letters are the way to go you'll find those in the debt collection section of our library.   get any income payments on going or otherwise moved into a parachute A/c.   it is most probable that whatever you do most A/c's will be defaulted once this is done if not already. bearing in mine your wish to re mortgage or move in a future, it is most probable that the quicker you do default , the earlier a DN will be registered thus the earlier these will not show following their 6th birthday. this might involve you thinking about stopping all payments now ensuring this does happen, then resuming payment under a pro rata scheme self administered , once this happens.   just be aware that no DMP providers will ever question enforceability, should that be relevant.     
    • LL would have Absolutely no chance of getting the smart meter changed back.....
    • slow down ...read what i'm asking , stating and trying to clarify.. it all might seem useless or totally irrelevant but it's important information moving forward with the whole situation and useful in the SPC claim moving forward     there was not 2 loans - the litigated OD is not a loan but it appears from your comment here..     sorry but then you did get scammed on many fronts... they allowed you to settle the loan exploiting your confusion over thinking it was the litigated account. they didn't tell you either and they would also have been aware of your statement filed response form:   The respondent had a junior account with the Bank of Scotland since a young age.  The Bank of Scotland offered the Respondent a loan of around £2500. This Respondent serviced the loan until losing her source of income and ran into some financial difficulty resulting in defaulting in servicing the loan.   they settled for a discounted sum... why? we usually find this is because they hold no enforceable paperwork at all. or was full of charges , charges could have been the discount or it could have been due to 'a business decision' ...   but sure as eggs is eggs there is no way 1st credit would not have raised a court claim for both the OD and the loan unless there was a very good reason. they didn't that smells...badly.   OD 's are notoriously difficult to litigate upon if defended properly...but with a loan in the same claim, with enforceable paperwork, they would have almost been guaranteed to win.   it's also a shame you didn't come where before you did anything but we are where we are.   now the above might seem harsh..even petty but our posts are not only for you and your issue they are also for future readers that find us via search engines or read like threads here alerting debtors to frequent pitfalls and innocent wet myself actions many do that all these dca's will and have exploited time and time again over the last +40yrs .   i'll try and get around to properly redacting all your pdf's tonight and get them back up. but before i finish and get on with the above........the status of the claim as it stands now.   From what i can gather the claim now hinges upon proving her ex at the time settled by a discounted payment to HBOS well before the sale to Intrum and the SPC Claim.   In all honestly and with regard to your comments in your previous posts upon his character, i seriously doubt this ever happened. the disclosures from Intrum contain all the OD statements , should that have happened, it would be detailed in those.   there is little point in the claimant hiding that info as they would be in far more legal trouble should they have doctored them than insuring a mere +£1k claim win. Even 1st credit wouldn't pull such stunts.   Sorry but there is little point in requesting HBOS to attend any future hearing, nor hoping the SAR shows anything different to the statements the claimant has disclosed . That will cost you more money , and more money in terms of the claimant attending another hearing.   there is one exploitation i see. that being the mention of a default notice. the claim states:  The respondent fell into arrears under the Finance Agreement. A Default Notice was Issued by the Original Creditor .   now default notices are not issued for OD A/C's (which ties in to the possible loan confusion and scam settlement i mentioned) . This tallies with a common mistake that many DCA's, including why i keep mentioning 1st credit, which is the previous name for Intrum, made on numerous claims and was one of the reasons for the name change. To Hide that They lost many Statutory Demand and court claims over the non existence of a DN or proof of it's issuance by the OC (a DCA can't issue a DN) .. No copy of a default notice is fatal to to successful  litigation.   even though in this OD case one was not ever needed. (Poor particulars of claim showing copy and paste, and never expecting a claim to be defended but responded to by a wet themselves response , which you did by settling a loan which you believed was the claimed debt when it never was)    other than that you indicate you made an OOC F&F offer in 09-20  have you advanced this option since ?   dx
  • 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 2754 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...