Barclaycard default date issue...

[Marino13]

Hi all,

 

Have what I think a slightly odd situation with Barclays at the moment, appreciate anyone's thoughts.

 

Years back I got into a dispute with Barclaycard, that ended with me being issued with a Default in December 2010. They then sold on the account to MKDP not long after, who hounded me for years, took me to court, but I saw them off.

 

I recently checked my credit report and noticed that this same account had had all this time 2 defaults registered against my name, by both Barclays and MKDP. MKDP registered their default 30 days after Barclays, who did theirs 7 months after the Default Notice, so there was obviously an overlap of some kind.

 

Naturally I complained to the credit ref agencies who said they could do nothing, so I complained directly to Barclays. They upheld my complaint, but their response still puzzles me. I'll quote:-

 

'...I have been unable to locate any record of a formal demand being issued to you. In view of this we can arrange for the default to be fully removed, however we would have to replace the default data. As your account has been in arrears since that time, this is what would be reported. The default will be removed 6 years from the date it was registered, however if we remove this the account would remain on your credit file 6 years from the date it was settled. This could mean that it would impact you for longer.'

 

Are they saying that yes, we messed up but ironically if we sort it out you will be even worse off? if the default is removed how can that make things worse? when would the 'settled' date be, when it was sold on to MKDP? bit confused by this one.

 

Barclays have offered to change the date to match the (later) date of MKDP so only one default should show (not even sure if that would work).

 

Any thoughts welcome. I'll decide if I should just let it run its course, or choose to pursue further. Thanks in advance.

[slick132]

Hi Marino,

 

There should only ever be 1 default on your CRA for any 1 a/c and it should be notified to the CRA's in a timely manner. The default date showing on your CRA files will not necessarily be the date of the DN itself.

 

We work on the basis that the default date is about 3 months after you failed to maintain required payments

 

We've seen many cases where BC failed to report the default status in a timely manner, or at all !!

 

If the a/c is sold, the new creditor's name will show against the a/c. However, the reported data should only show for 6 years from when the a/c fell into arrears.

 

1. When did you last pay towards the a/c.

 

2. When did the a/c first become delinquent.

 

[Marino13]

Thanks for the quick reply!

My last payment to the account was Feb 2010 I'm reasonably sure, DN issued in Nov 2010.

The account fell into arrears from Feb 2010 onwards, as I refused to pay while the dispute was ongoing. Dispute was never resolved.

 

After a failure to agree, Mercers sent a couple of letters then a bit later MKDP bought the account.

[slick132]

By my reckoning, a default marker should have been posted by BC or Mercers by May 2010.

 

I'd write to BC saying they should have reported arrears within a timely manner and, in any event, no later that May 2010.

 

Accordingly, unless they amend the CRA date to May 2010, you'll make a formal complaint to the ICO and you'll also take court action (but only say this if you're prepared to take court action).

 

Maybe wait a while to see if other advice is forthcoming .................

 

[martin2006]

Identical as mine. BC account delinquent and Default should have been by feb 2010, but now shows as MKDP defaulted 08/2014, 2 accounts appear on my file, 1 for each, so 2 defaults for same alleged debt.

 

Now that HPH2 are the new owners they too have updated things so waiting for 6 weeksish for all to catch up and see if i now have 3 defaults for same alleged debt, this will kinda tie in with allowing barclays the full 8 weeks to respond to my multi faceted complaint anyway, so far they not playing ball!!

[martin2006]

By my reckoning, a default marker should have been posted by BC or Mercers by May 2010.

 

if last payment was feb 2010, then acc is in default by may 2010 and should be reported as such no later than beginning of sept 2010 according to ICO guideline

[Marino13]

Barclays have form it seems. They seem to have been lax in applying the DN but I am still confused as to why removing the default would be a bad thing?

 

As I have neither paid nor acknowledged the debt for over 6 years now it cannot be enforced, but as things stand I would still have over a year to go before the default(s) fall off my credit report, not obviously I am happy about. Why would the account remain on the record even longer if they removed the default, as the default of account actually occurred in Feb 2010?

 

Barclays logic here escapes me, so I thought I was missing something.