Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi there. I have just received notice that DCB Legal has discontinued their claim against me. What a relief. I'm hugely grateful to all of you for your help in fighting these people and their evil business model. I will be making a donation to the Consumer Action Group so you can continue helping others like me.
    • Thank you BankFodder. I will do as you suggest to get everything in writing first and will construct the letter of claim over the weekend. Is it best to use the format for the letter of claim as the one on this website? Lastly, did I read the judgement correctly for the Farooq judgement as its not quite clear to me which act I am covered best by?
    • A letter of claim can't be served by email as per CPR 6.3 unless you've specifically told them. Also can't give you 7 days to pay, they've got to give at least 14 days. They know this, they're just hoping you wet yourself and cough up. This won't be going anywhere. IGNORE.
    • Good Morning, I received a speeding ticket last December, I had requested further information from the ticket office which they provided, I also sent back the form confirming i was the diver at the time, however, i had overlooked the signature at the bottom of the page, nobody from the ticket office got back in touch to mention this and i was trying to book a course with no luck, I got in touch with them and sent them a screenshot showing them I was unable to book the course, they came came back to me and said we have no documents to say you were the driver (they did they just failed to mention I never signed it) they re sent the form and it was over the 120 days, i had mentioned to them previously that the timeframe was coming up and they would need to extend this. They are now saying they have complied legally and i need to accept the 3 points, I am trying to plead my case and I am tempted to let this go to court and provide the evidence of my constant communication on the matter. has anyone got any experience with this? TIA.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Default - Closed Account


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6329 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

This is what appears on my credit file:

 

MORTGAGE COMPANY

TERMS 300@ £XXXX monthly (INCORRECT)

BALANCES Limit 0

Start £XX,XXX

Current £+ (INCORRECT)

Delinquent £XXX,XXX (INCORRECT)

 

 

 

EFFECTIVE DATES

 

Start 1989

Delinquent XX/2001 (INCORRECT SHOULD BE 1992)

End XX/2001

LAST UPDATED/CREATED 06/2006

 

 

 

MONTHLY STATUS R6666666666666666666666666666666666

First of all lots of inaccuracy, secondly since they have now closed the account and the default was some 14 years ago, can I ask them to remove this from my file alltogether.

Needless to say since I am self employed this causes a lot of problems with my day to day business, I have been refused faciliities because of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brar in mind that what you consider to be 'incorrect' and what they do may be different. If you can't agree, you may need to complain to the Information Commissioner.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank Zootscoot

 

Robertxc-I have documenatry evidence from lenders own notes. (got this from the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request))

 

My only concern is that out of their own wisdom they decide to put the End Date for this as sept. 2001, don't know where they got that date from. From the Information Commissioners Office site I gather that lenders can leave info. for 6 years from the end date.

 

The other thing is why did they wait until June 2006 to create this record on my file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that if the default is 6 years old or more, it should come off of your file anyeay; whether it was settled or not!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that if the default is 6 years old or more, it should come off of your file anyeay; whether it was settled or not!
I think you need to check this with the Information Commissioner. I wouldn't rely on it.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank Zootscoot

 

Robertxc-I have documenatry evidence from lenders own notes. (got this from the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request))

 

My only concern is that out of their own wisdom they decide to put the End Date for this as sept. 2001, don't know where they got that date from. From the Information Commissioners Office site I gather that lenders can leave info. for 6 years from the end date.

 

The other thing is why did they wait until June 2006 to create this record on my file.

The Data Protection Act is quite clear that personal data must be accurate. I suggest you write to them and get a 'final response' (probably "Get Lost"). Then make a complaint to the Information Commissioner.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi dhoom, what sort of accounts are these? Accounts with unlawful bank charges which form par of the balance, or loan/credit card accoutns which should have a credit agreement which you signed?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi un1boy

This is an old mortgage I had back in 1989.

 

I have recently found out that an order for possession was made back in 1992, and the original default took place 1991/2.

 

My contention is that they should stop processing this data since the default was some 13/14 years ago. They might argue that they have a right to process this info. 6 years from when they closed the account i.e. 6 yrs from 9/2001.

 

For some reason they only created this record on my file in June 2006.

 

I thought they had duty to update this on a regular basis, they have made no updates.

 

I think they are just trying to make things difficult for me.

 

Incidentally I remember when I did my credit search in 1991, there was no record of this mortgage with any agencies. From my recollection and all the documents they have since sent me, I cannot see any reference of giving them authority of processing such information.I could be wrong or maybe they have simpy not sent me all the documents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dhoom

 

Can you say what doc's they've actually sent you? I'd contend that if they have no agreement or that, as you say, the documents you have give no permission to process your data then you have every reason to get any defamatory info removed from the CRA files.

 

Robert, IIRC, the ICO have washed their hands regarding the period of data retention that the CRA/bank axis have agreed amongst themselves.

 

Rosie :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rosie

The right to process my data would have been at the time of filling out an application. Apart from looking at all the documents they sent me (from my SAR request), I also looked a few times at the bundle they have sent me which has all the applications papers and forms in and this doesn't have any provision about processing my data and there are no other documents in the application file that has any relevance or reference to sharing of information.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dhoom, have you tried contacting the CRA(s) concerned and asking thm to remove it as it is over 6 years?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have spoken to the CRA, and one person says because they only ended the account in 9/2006, its 6 years from then, not from default. I guess they will tell me that they are only processing the data they have been supplied by the data controller blah blah blah

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rosie

The right to process my data would have been at the time of filling out an application. Apart from looking at all the documents they sent me (from my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) request), I also looked a few times at the bundle they have sent me which has all the applications papers and forms in and this doesn't have any provision about processing my data and there are no other documents in the application file that has any relevance or reference to sharing of information.

 

Well maybe it might be worth you wriitng to the original lender and telling them that as they have no evidence they are processing defamatory data. If they don't remove it, you will issue legal action.

 

Whislt you are waiting for their reply, I would start drafting your N1 particulars!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I would just write to them politely asking them if they can explain to you, in writing, exactly what has happened (in terms of why they have registered the default so long after it happened) and say in the letter that as they cannot substanciate the processing of your data as lawful by providing evidence that you agreed to it, and that because they did not send you a default notice (which is a breach of the CCA) then would they consider removing the data because is is defamatory.

 

Advise them that if they don't then you will have no option but to issue legal proceedings.

 

Now, I am by no means any sort of expert on this at all but I guess it's worth a try?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...