Interesting default 'reporting procedure' from Lending Stream

[Ignition]

All,

 

This may help some folks if this is actually the company in question's process but I wanted to check first if it was above board or not.

 

The scenario is 2 defaults from the same creditor, which were taken over by a 3rd party,

however the earlier defaults were left on file and new ones added. 2 defaults for the same account.

This has been sorted but it showed some quite interesting discrepancies.

 

The accounts had the same start start date but different default dates and amounts.

I put this to the original creditor and received the following response, with account numbers removed to protect the innocent:

 

1. We transferred your loan accounts xxx and xxx to Motormile Finance Ltd (MMF) in February, 2014

and we reported these accounts as transferred/sold to the Credit Reference Agencies (CRA). At the time when your accounts were transferred to MMF

, the outstanding balances were £1448.00 and £673.00 respectively.

 

2. Both the above loan accounts went in Default status with us on 02nd September, 2012 due to non-payments

and we sent you a Notice of Default via email (on 04th September, 2015) as well as via Post to notify you about the same.

Please find attached the Default notices which were sent to you.

 

3. According to our reporting procedure, we give our customers 180 days post the account goes into Default to get the loan up-to-date or closed.

Since we did not receive the payments within this time frame, we reported the same to CRA's on 30th January, 2013.

 

 

At the time when we reported this to CRA's, the balance for your accounts were £1386.00 and £611.00 respectively.

This is the reason, the Default date for these accounts are showing for 30th January, 2015 with the Default balance of £1336.00 and £611.00 respectively on your credit file.

 

 

As these are genuine Default marks, we would not be able to remove them from your credit file.

 

 

The MMF reported default gave default dates of 2 weeks after the NoD was issued and the balances reflected those on the default notices.

 

Credit file reports 3 missed payments then account into default, which is interesting given that one account went into default status on 2nd September,

showing 3 monthly payments missed, having been opened on 5th July, less than 2 months previously.

 

I have a suspicion that this reporting process is a big no-no.

I also have a suspicion that they register a default with the CRAs promptly for the amount on the default notice

then change the details on said default when they sell it on.

The technical guidance the ICO supply regarding report of defaults seems to bear this out.

 

It's also fairly interesting to note that between 2nd September and 30th January isn't 180 days.

 

It looks like this creditor plays extremely fast and loose with the reports they provide to CRAs.

The 'reporting procedure' I've been given also appears to at very least not be followed.

 

I have presented this to the main CRA, they previously asked this creditor if the data was correct which they have, of course, confirmed.

I have supplied the additional information to them and suggested they should perhaps take proactive action

given the creditor has told me that they, as a matter of procedure, don't follow proper process.

 

I would welcome the thoughts of those more knowledgeable.

[dx100uk]

well where MMF are involved I would never believe anything they say or do.

 

 

dx

[Ignition]

The MMF data actually matches the NoD, which is more than could be said for the original creditor.

 

MMF have agreed that their default was placed in error and have removed it.

[Ignition]

Incidentally despite being presented with evidence that the defaults are incorrect the CRA in question is simply shrugging its shoulders and continuing to keep the data on file.

 

Its response is to ask the creditor again if the data is correct, which they'll probably confirm as they have already once, and completely ignore that they claim to misreport to the CRA as a matter of procedure.

[obiter dictum]

I had two defaults from motor mouth, both have now disappeared and nothing for the last few months

[silverfox1961]

Hi

The main problems with credit reference agencies are that they work with information provided by others.

 

In the event of a dispute, all they can do is mark your file accordingly until a response is provided by the creditor. They do not require proof that the info is correct, just the creditors say so.

 

If a creditor fails to respond in a reasonable time, the CRA can remove the default. It is down to the debtor to contact the creditor to dispute and then either the ICO or court action.

 

Makes you feel that business has you by the cajones

[Ignition]

Doesn't it?

 

For the curious the company in question is Lending Stream. I have thanked them for their response, informed them it's really not on, and asked them to confirm that's their full and final response so that I can raise it with the ICO and begin court action without further delay

[timeforredress]

Doesn't it?

 

For the curious the company in question is Lending Stream. I have thanked them for their response, informed them it's really not on, and asked them to confirm that's their full and final response so that I can raise it with the ICO and begin court action without further delay

 

I had a similar situation with Lending Stream, after reading some of the success stories on other posts, I complained to Lending Stream and have recieved full redress fromthem and a promise of default removal.I had also complained to MMF about the way they were reporting defaults on two accounts one of which was LS, they did not respond and I went to FOS, who have ruled in my favour with £75 compensation and removal of deafults from the CRA's.

[btd332]

Hi Ignition, the response you got from Lending Stream that you've quoted in your post, who did you write/email to in order to recieve this? I have a similar situation with lendingstream from a loan I paid back a couple of years ago and would like to get the ball rolling to get it removed.

 

Cheers