In addition to claims, should we complain more?

[L1882]

I've just sent a complaint to Lowlifes regarding not updating the balances on my credit file for accounts they hold,

my basis being that this could be detrimental to my ability to obtain employment and/or credit etc

and that under the ICO's “Principles for the Reporting of Arrears, Arrangements and Defaults at Credit Reference Agencies”

they clearly fall short of ensuring that the information is "fair, accurate, consistent, complete and up to date. “ .

 

No I don't honestly expect to get far with the actual complaint but it will hopefully use some of their resource to address the issue,

if the response is as poor as anticipated this will cost them about £550.00 if I escalate to the FOS/ICO (not sure which would be the correct one)

and, perhaps most important of all, IF they get avalanches of complaints it might just give them a desire to rethink their practices!

 

So how much do people on here register complaints, in addition to launching legal action etc?

- and is it worth the effort of am I peeing in the wind and they just don't pay any attention to it?

[Conniff]

I don't think the UK consumer complains nearly enough. Commerce knows that most threats are just that, threats and in general go nowhere. If someone makes a threat of reporting or taking court action, they should follow it up or not make the threat if they

then either have no intention of doing so or can't be bothered.

[L1882]

I'd have to say I am guilty as charged - but no more.

[BankFodder]

I think that you are peeing in the wind.

 

If you want to complain then you have to complain to the regulatory authorities – Information Commissioner.

 

However, you can be sure that this will have very little effect either.

 

The only thing to do is to claim. That does make a difference. It forces the company to engage with you and to spend their resources on dealing with you.

 

Not only that, if you get a judgement – for a breach of the data protection act, for instance – then you can send that to the information Commissioner and it might – just might – attract some attention.

 

The ombudsman is a cosy little industry arrangement that has been legitimised by Parliament but still remains a cosy little industry arrangement the doesn't do a lot of good. It's a little bit bothersome to the industry but not very much and they prefer it to being drawn into the courts.

 

The information Commissioner is a proper statutory body that has nothing to do with any industries and should be a real champion of individual personal interests. Unfortunately it seems to join the ombudsman in having become a bit too tight with the industries and the companies which is meant to be policing. I think that they find the complaints of all individuals to be rather bothersome and taking up resources.

 

I suppose part of the problem is that ordinary individuals can never taken out to dinner or meet them at well supplied meetings and conferences around the country.

 

An example the cosy relationship that the ombudsman has with the banks for instance can be seen in the thread started by nellyj99 against the National Westminster bank.

 

A recent subject access request produced a big bundle of documents and included in there was an internal memorandum which showed that the bank had had advanced private discussions with the ombudsman about Nellyj's case and what the likely outcome might be if a complaint was brought.

 

It was after they received private advice about the question that they then wrote to Nellyj and suggested to him that he ought to bring his complaint to the ombudsman because he would then be certain that he would receive "independent scrutiny".

 

Do you think that there is something rotten in the air?

 

Go figure

[L1882]

I hear what you are saying BF - but doesn't there have to be a "triable" element to bring it before the court?

 

In the case of my recent complaints, such as not updating the balance, I'm not sure there would be - or that it would meet the 4 questions as listed in Patricia Pearl book. In which case complaints are all that is left and though clearly not as potentially effective as the courts at least it does cause them to expend some energy. The alternative is, to quote Jim Carey's character in Liar Liar, bend over and take it up the tail pipe.

 

I can't say I'm surprised about the ombudsman thing and as a general rule I wouldn't go that route unless it was the only option open to me. As a question then, I believe a default date has been applied far to late to one of my accounts. This is contrary to the guidance mentioned above and I've written to the creditor asking they put the date to what, IMHO, it should be. If, as seems likely, they decline on what grounds do you think I can bring a court case - because I am happy to do that if it is a viable option.

[BankFodder]

If the result of not updating your balance is that your credit file is inaccurate, then this is a breach of the data protection act by whoever it is who was responsible for updating the record.

 

If the failure to update the balance is because of the omission of somebody with whom you have a contract or had a contract with then this is probably also a breach of contract as they would have a contractual responsibility to maintain your records in a proper and accurate fashion.

 

What are the four questions are asked Patricia Pearl's book?

[L1882]

Can't remember them word for word but I think they covered likelihood of success, whether the other party would be able to pay if you won, did the size of the claim justify the cost etc - I'll look again tonight when I get home but I do remember taking the impression that a case like this wouldn't be likely to succeed.

 

But in your opinion I (or anybody for that matter) could make a legal argument that says 'you didn't update my record - in fact you erroneously increased the balance and subsequently have not updated my balance to show payments made or the correction of your error - therefore you are in breach of contract and in breach of the data protection act?' Because I am more than happy to consider bringing a case - though I need to be careful I don't overload as I'm close to issuing 2 in the next few weeks against Barclaycard and NPOWER and I've also got a likely case against HBOS which I anticipate I will be sending a letter before action on at some point in the next 2 weeks. As I don't know what I'm doing I think I will need to try and stagger the claims somewhat.

[BankFodder]

I think they covered likelihood of success, whether the other party would be able to pay if you won, did the size of the claim justify the cost etc - I'll look again tonight when I get home but I do remember taking the impression that a case like this wouldn't be likely to succeed.

I think that there are clear duties either contractually or as a result of data protection legislation and if they breach those duties then I don't see any problem with bring claim.

 

It is because so few people bring claims that these companies gave very casual about the way they do their work. The regulator isn't interested in making an example of them or imposing sensible sanctions which are calculated to discourage wrongdoing and to improve quality. Ordinary people are to under confident about their position to bring a claim so for the companies that causes problems, life goes on as usual and they don't care.

 

Out of the three questions that you have posed and which I quoted above, the third one is rather interesting because what I'm quite sure Patricia Pearl doesn't ask is is whether the defendant asks themselves the reciprocal question which is whether defending a claim of that size is worth the cost.

 

What ordinary individuals need to understand is that although a modest amount of compensation – for instance £100 – might be quite an interesting sum for them, the companies they are suing find it just a nuisance. They hundred pounds for Lowell's awesome of the company is just small change and coupled with the effort needed to have to travel to the claimant's local court et cetera it means that the defendant will be extremely reluctant to run a defence all the way to a hearing – when there is a reasonable chance they will lose and also because of the small claims rules they will not get their costs back and it will simply interfere with business.

 

This is an important question which I'm quite sure Patricia Pearl doesn't ask and also which very few people asked themselves either.

 

When it comes to ordinary consumers suing big companies, this is one of the important questions that needs to be asked all the time.

 

I'm quite sure that Patricia Pearl's questions are extremely important – but question number three is far less important to the claimant in person than it is to the corporate claimant. In fact, I would say that Patricia Pearl's third question could almost be dismissed and replaced with the reciprocal question which I have already identified – given the risk of losing, will the defendant consider that the possible outcome will justify the cost of defending.

[L1882]

As someone who has never even considered bringing a case of any kind until recently and who is now faced with rather formal and prescriptive looking POC, CPR and other things I can understand why the average person doesn't bring a claim. Couple with that trying to understand under what legal basis you are bringing the case and how to word everything in a fashion that a judge would find acceptable it can all seem rather daunting.

 

Put another way, without this site I would not even be considering it - and even with this sites help I am worried, over awed, daunted, nervous and scared!

 

And should add - I consider myself to be of reasonable intelligence, educated to a decent standard.

[L1882]

Ok BF well they've replied and in essence say they'll correct the error, system failt etc. they don't think not warrants compensation but are sending me a cheque for £20.

 

I've decided I'm not happy so I'm thinking you have a point - I'm issuing against barclaycard, I'll no doubt shortly be doing the same against capital one and HBOS - so in for a penny. I'm going to take this to court as well. Going to cost me a fortune over the next few months but so what - compared to the claims for penalty charges this will be a relatively simple case anyway.