Experian response to initial letter

[conar686]

Just received a response from Experian with regard to my (templated) letter requesting they remove, amend & otherwise desist from processing my data without my permission.

 

Their response states that the Info Commisioner has informed them that they do not need my (our) consent to process account information on me (us).

 

They then go on to quote the 1st data protection principle refering to 1 condition in Sched 2 & in the case of sensitive data at least 1 condition in Sched 3.

 

I've scanned the relevant pages which contain significant statements from Info Comm & their assertion that they are allowed to process our data for a period of 6 yrs but don't know how to attach them to these threads for our resident experts to pick apart?

 

How do I put scanned letters on this site?

[lookinforinfo]

You need a printer/scanne connected to the computer. Failing that, type in

the salient points by hand.

 

If you have financial contracts in place-bank accounts, loans, credit cards

mobile phones, electricity, gas and cable/sky tv, you will have given all of them permission to report your behaviour with them to the CRAs, so Experian

does not need to observe your request.

 

They are on stickier ground whenever you terminate a contract with one of

the companies listed above though CRAs seem to think that they can only

amend or alter data on the instructions of their clients.

 

I hope they will be disabused of this policy soon.

[conar686]

Rgr that

 

I've got scanner/printer connected so how do I do the business.

 

Where I have been defaulted I have asssumed that the contract has ended & so has their right to process my data.

 

I'll do the salient bits anyway: They begin with

 

Under schedule 2 - I should have given my consent by entering into deals with institutions - The info Comm has stated that orgs should consider other conditions for processing before looking @ consent.

 

In context of applying for credit the CRAs recognise that as we have no choice but to share our data on our applications they cannot assume we consent to them processing our data.

 

The info Comm has notified them of this condition which covers sharing of account data for the duration of the contract & 6 years beyond.

 

" The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data was disclosed, except where the processing is unwarrented in any particular case because of predudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject" Sir Humphrey Appleby lives

 

They have been informed that the Info Comm takes a wide view of legitimate interests and considers that it is in the interests of other creditors to make make informed lending decisions.

 

They then state the 5th data principle about data not being kept for longer than necessary for the purpose of those purposes - what ever that means

 

They then state that account info is held for 6 yrs, but do not say by what legal statute they are allowed to do this, and that this data is taken into account by credit grantors when credit apps are assesed.

 

As a consequence this historical information is relevant to the purpose of credit referencing and by holding this data the Info Comm has confirmed that the CRAs do not appear to be in breach of the 5th principle.

 

They confirm that my assertion that they take 'reasonable steps' to ensure the accuracy of the data held, however their clients sign strict T&Cs which ensure that data provided to the CRA is accurate. The Info Comm considers those T&Cs as 'reasonable steps'

 

They do carry out generic chks on the data held, however it is not possible to chk every individuals data as this would mean them going back to the company and asking them to chk data that as far as they are concerned (cause of T&Cs) the data is already accurate.

 

It was signed by Mr LJ Hancock Consumer Compliance Executive - Directors Office.

 

OK I can see a few holes to dive down:

 

1. where is the legal statute that allows them to retain data for 6yrs?

2. The info comm states that the CRAs do not appear to be in breach of the 5th data principle - I disagree & so does everyone else

3. They have not provided me with references to the info comms statements so I'm expected to take their word - yeh right

4. They do not appear to police their client contracts and trust that finance organisation honour their side of contracts - are they serious

 

It would appear on the face of it that the CRAs are getting seroius wrt our campaign to clear our names of dross data. Advice on how to poceed from here would be appreciated

 

MAC

[rippedoffagain]

You can upload you scanned docs to ImageShack® - Hosting

 

Then link to the url, like this.

 

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/8622/imageshackvn1.jpg

 

Press the browse button, find your doc, click ok, then Host it.

 

Use the last one (Direct link to image)

[lookinforinfo]

Conar that is their standard reply. They would have you believe from their

letters that they are in constant contact with the ICO, when what they

quote the ICO have said is lifted straight from the guidelines on the Data

Protection Act issued by the ICO.

 

Things like ccjs and details of bankruptcies are by law shown on record for

six years, and so the financial industry have used that as the yardstick

for showing their own system. While it has no legal standing, the authorities

are not prepared to challenge them since they want the industry to have a

set of checks in place to prevent the public from getting over involved in

debt.

 

However while data can be processed while an account is in force, once the

laccount is closed, there should be no provision in most cases for that data

to continue to be processed.

[conar686]

Thanks for the uloading tips sport

 

So my next step in the process is to challenge their assertions - what is recommended?

 

Here are the scanned images

 

ImageShack - Hosting :: eperian1pb2.jpg

 

ImageShack - Hosting :: eperian2en1.jpg

[mila]

Hi Conar,

 

I too have received a letter from Lee Hancock.

 

I wrote to Experian about "old data" and the need to remove them. Hancock basically wrote back with a standard letter and so bascally he has not fully responded to my letter.

 

I will be drafting up a more sterner letter.

 

This time I will be asking for defaults to be removed as the accounts have been closed.

 

Any help will be appriciated

 

mila

[conar686]

Draft of letter sent to Experian post Hancock Letter requesting they do the right thing

 

Mr LJ Hancock

Consumer Compliance Executive

Experian Limited

PO Box 9000

Nottingham

NG80 7WP

Dated 18 Feb 07

 

Your Reference: LJH/41160861 dated 10 Jan 07

Our Reference: 41160861/3

 

1. Thank you for your letter dated 10 Feb 07, my apologies again for the tardiness of my response. I have read with interest and noted your comments however there are some things you mention which needs must be addressed.

2. You quite rightly state ‘consent’ is not a measure to be relied upon. With regard to your clients it is not sufficient for Experian to simply say that they cannot amend my data without my consent or that of the companies concerned.

3. With regards to the issue of my consent and the Information Commissioner’s recent guideline about default accounts, I would like to remind you that they are just that, guidelines.

4. You stated "settled, closed or defaulted accounts would only be retained with my consent as per the terms and conditions I have complied with."

5. The issue here is that for all entries mentioned, the providers have failed to provide proof of my consent; as I am sure you are no doubt aware, Experian is a Data Controller within its own right and has a legal obligation to make sure the information it holds is accurate and obtained lawfully, not merely to trust the word of credit companies & other financial institutions based on signature of T&Cs.

6. I am contesting that the continued processing of my data (as contained in my letter of the 27th) is an unwarranted act, my written permission allowing these companies to continue processing, or disclosing, my personal subject data was revoked upon termination of that original contract (through either default, cancellation or satisfaction) and I hereby reiterate that revocation.

7. You mention that you are writing to the companies concerned and I appreciate your efforts in this regard. You will note, as mentioned above that Experian has a legal obligation to ensure all information it holds is obtained lawfully.

8. In anticipation of your reply that the companies state the information is correct and you cannot remove or amend it, I require you to provide evidence as per your obligations as a Data Controller that you have ensured its accuracy and legality.

 

 

9. I note your advice on obtaining ‘default notices’ under section 7 of the DPA; I am surprised that you would think I had not already done this.

10. I have, to date, not received a response from the companies listed in my letter dated 27 Jan 07, nor do I recall ever receiving any Default notices as mentioned in my CRA report. Unless these companies & institutions can provide a true copy of the said Notice, then I consider that any default entry on my credit files to be wholly unwarranted.

11. However, even if they can supply the copy, then I also contest their continued processing on the following grounds as under the Data Protection Act (Data Protection Act), Schedule 1, Part 1 ("The Principles") in relation to the manner in which my data is collated, stored and processed. Of particular note, are Principles 3, 4 and 5:

a. Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed.

b. Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.

c. Personal data processed for any purpose or purposes shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose or those purposes.”

12. In my case, companies are still processing data after the cancellation of the contract, whether or not this is a simple renewal process of the default flag, daily or by other timing factor. As a contract is no longer in force, then my written permission has also ceased from the date of cancellation for them to process my data.

13. This is confirmed in Principle 2 of the Data Protection Act, which states:

a. Personal data shall be obtained only for one or more specified and lawful purposes, and shall not be further processed in any manner incompatible with that purpose or those purposes."

14. I emphasise the term "specified and lawful purposes" as in ‘those specified within the contract’, and no more. I also emphasise the term "shall not be further processed". There is no lawful purpose for anyone mentioned in my letter of the 27th to process my data other than with my written permission.

15. In respect of your contention with respect to the ‘6 year rule’ this is naught more than ‘industry best practice’ & has no basis in law. It is not up to Credit Reference Agencies, or lenders, to decide legal issues.

16. After seeking advice on of all the relevant legislation, including the Consumer Credit Act (As Amended), the various Financial Services Acts and the Data Protection Act, etc., it is clear that there is absolutely no legislation that allows a lender or supplier to collate, process or distribute any other information unless there is express written permission from the data subject

17. Therefore, I contend that you do not have a ‘legal right’ to hold my data for any longer than I allow it, the only exception of this is in relation to information in the public domain, i.e. in my case the 2 CCJs (These are kept in the public domain for six years), note I am in the process of having these CCJs overturned as being based on false & misleading evidence.

18. If this situation were to end up in Court, a Judge would be required to rule based on the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998 (Data Protection Act); the guidance provided by the Information Commissioners Office will not taken into account. You will note that a Judge may also rule taking the European Court of Human Right’s regulations into consideration.

19. In summary, I do not & will not accept a reply stating that my data cannot be removed purely based on the fact that the companies concerned have not given you permission to do so or that you are merely following guidelines or industry best practice, supplied to you by the Information Commissioner, rather than the law.

20. I would prefer Experian to act within the law and comply with the regulations they are bound by without my seeking other action, such as reporting to the Information Commissioner or ultimately referring my complaint to the courts. I expect to find my data amended, as previously requested, within the next 10 days.

 

 

Yours Faithfully

 

[signed by email]

 

[ClintMccutcheon]

Good luck, seems a sound letter.

[lookinforinfo]

That's a good letter Conar, I await their reply with interest.

[LeeS80]

I'll be interested in their reply too.....

[hondamad21]

Hey conar686,

 

Just wanted to which you luck with the letter. I have also been in touch via e-mail with Mr Lee Hancock over the same issue. :)

I think I will start my own thread and post all his replies (which don't make much legal sense) later today!

 

Hondamad21

[conar686]

The following was received by email from the bold Mr Hancock. He has not quoted nor referenced legal precedent so I can assume there is none

 

It would look like I've upset him and Experian won't enter into further correspondence in this matter

 

I can send them the 'stop automatically processing my data letter' but thats not going to get old or defaulted records expunged.

 

So need a help on strategy that will get Mr Hancocks attention & drafting a strong letter to the Info Comm, I need some advice on how best to proceed now.

 

 

Thank you for your e-mails received 17, 18 and 26 February 2007.

 

I note that you have dismissed the Information Commissioner's recommendations and do not believe that they will be taken into account by a court of law. Before undertaking potentially expensive legal action I would remind you that the Information Commissioner's Office is an independent official government body responsible for administering the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I therefore believe that it is highly likely that the Information Commissioner's recommendations will be seriously considered when being assessed in a court of law.

 

In your e-mail you have also referred to article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998. The 1998 Act requires all 'public authorities' to act compatibly with the rights contained in Schedule 1 of the Act. However, Experian is not a public authority but a private company carrying on commercial activities. It follows that the 1998 Act does not directly place upon us any additional responsibilities or duties. However, Parliament has for a long time recognised the sensitivity of the type of information which we hold and that is why the work that we do is governed by the strict rules contained in the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Data Protection Act 1998. This legislation ensures that the information we hold about you is dealt with carefully and fairly.

 

I would also draw your attention to the recent Government consultation on over-indebtedness. This specifically looked at the possibility of sharing what the Government perceived as non-consensual data. Information held where a "fair processing" notice was not contained within the original credit agreement. Typically, accounts opened before the late 1990s did not contain such fair processing notices. In practice this means that lenders are unable to share that data, other than in instances of default.

 

If an individual could simply have an account removed at the point that it became defaulted, there would be little incentive to maintain a good payment history on that account. The account holder would be aware that their ability to obtain credit in the long-term would not be compromised through their failure to meet the terms of the original agreement and this could lead to more people being less careful in how they managing their financial affairs.

 

This would ultimately be likely to result in more bad debt leading to higher interest rates for us all due to the inability of companies to properly assess applicants and the increased amount of debt that they would have to write off.

 

Therefore, we will not be removing the defaulted accounts, to which you refer, from your report and I hope that I have adequately explained our reasons for taking this stance.

 

As the Information Commissioner has advised that your consent is not required for us to process account information about you and you have previously advised that you entered into repayment arrangements with the companies concerned we will not be answering any further correspondence from you in connection with this matter.

 

Any other queries that you may have about your report will be dealt with in accordance with Section 159 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

You may wish to take up this matter with our regulator, the Information Commissioner. The contact details you may require are as follows:

 

The Information Commissioner's Office: Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF

 

Further to our recent correspondence, I have been contacted by GE Capital and Co-Operative Bank. They have confirmed that the details we hold are accurate and have requested that we retain the information on our database. Unfortunately I am unable to amend this information without the authorisation of the company in question. If you have any further queries or wish to discuss this further, may I suggest you contact the company concerned direct at the following address:

 

GE Capital Bank Ltd: Credit Management, Trent House, Torre Road, Leeds, LS99 2BD

 

Cooperative Bank plc: Team 430, Delf House, Southway, Skelmersdale, Lancs, WN8 6NY

 

The 'Notice of Dispute' will remain on your report for 28 days it will then be removed, unless I receive further notification from you:

 

"THE ACCURACY OF THIS DATA HAS BEEN DISPUTED BY THE INDIVIDUAL CONCERNED AND WE HAVE NOW CONTACTED THE SUBSCRIBER. CARE SHOULD THEREFORE BE TAKEN WHEN USING THIS ITEM OF DATA TO ASSESS THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INDIVIDUAL CONCERNED".

 

You may be aware that you are able to add a short explanatory statement, called a 'Notice of Correction', to your credit report. If you wish to add such a statement, anyone searching your details in the future, as well as companies who have searched the report in the past six months, will see a copy of it and it may have an effect on any future applications you make.

 

If you would like to add a 'Notice of Correction' to your credit report, please let us know the exact wording you would like to use. We cannot add a statement that is longer than 200 words or one we think is defamatory, frivolous, scandalous or unsuitable for publication for some other reason.

 

If you have any further queries, please feel free to contact me directly either by e-mail at [email protected], by telephone on 0115 9055453 or by writing to me at the following address:

 

Directors' Office, Experian Ltd, PO Box 8000, Nottingham, NG80 7WF

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

 

Mr L J Hancock

Consumer Compliance Executive

Directors' Office

[conar686]

Sent the following letter to EXPERIAN

 

Consumer Compliance Executive

Experian Limited

PO Box 9000

Nottingham

NG80 7WP

 

Dated 3 Mar 07

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

Dear Mr Hancock

I am in receipt of your email dated 28 Feb 07 the contents of which have been noted, I do not agree with your assessment, and am confident that I will win should this matter reach a court of Law.

I have not dismissed the ICO recommendations, rather I have noted them and asked for the statue in Law that allows you to process data on me that is plainly false, misleading or satisfied.

To reiterate all I have asked is that Experian

a. As Data Controller make sure the information it holds is accurate and obtained lawfully, I am within my rights to request you to please provide me with proof (copies of mails or letters will suffice) that you have done so.

b. Remove Satisfied & old data, as there is no legal statute that allows you process this data for a period longer than I allow it, certainly not 6 years. If I am mistaken please provide me with the appropriate statue.

c. Remove defaulted data as being misleading & false, I received no default notices nor have these companies provided me with true-signed copies of said, despite many a request for them to do so.

I have no interest in debating the differences between guidance & legality at this present time so please respond only to the points I have made above.

I’d hoped that we could have come to an amicable arrangement with respect to my data held & processed by Experian you leave me with little choice other than the following;

This is a formal notice, served under the provisions of Chapter 29 of the Data Protection Act 1998 in requesting that you conform to my demand for a change in the manner in which you hold and process subject data about me.

As you are no doubt aware, Schedule II, Section 12 (1) of the said Act allows all data subjects the right to insist on the removal of any and all data from automated processes in respect of matters relating to them. I have reproduced that clause for your information, in case you do not have a copy to hand:

An individual is entitled at any time, by notice in writing to any data controller, to require the data controller to ensure that no decision taken by or on behalf of the data controller which significantly affects that individual is based solely on the processing by automatic means of personal data in respect of which that individual is the data subject for the purpose of evaluating matters relating to him such as, for example, his performance at work, his creditworthiness, his reliability or his conduct

You will note the exact language of the Act, in that such a request may be made in relation to a number of different reference checks "which significantly affects that individual", and the Acts specifically cites "credit worthiness" as one of those examples.

Recent checks on my file have caused severe complications, and now "significantly affect" my everyday life, and that of my family. An additional point to note is that issues of this nature that adversely affect "normal family life" are in breach of the Human Rights Act to which I referred in last letter.

Therefore, you have seven days from receipt of this letter to remove all such data from your system where it is referenced and processed via automated processes. You will obviously need to transfer it to your manual process system and alert your customers that my data can no longer be searched automatically.

If you fail to comply with the above, I will, initially, place a complaint with the Information Commissioners Office as your failure to comply with a properly served notice.

I will also seek guidance on your suitability to hold a Data Protection licence when you are clearly holding data that is no longer relevant to the account, the account information provider or the data subject, and is being held after a contract has been terminated, by whatever means, whether by default or cancellation.

Should ICO fail to take action I will be left with no other option to apply for an N1 County Court Order against you, which my legal representative & I are confident will result in you accruing Court fees, other legal expenses and disbursements.

I look forward to receiving your confirmation that the above change has been made to my file by the 12 Mar 07.

 

 

 

 

Yours Faithfully

 

 

[Black Rat]

Here we go (just subscribing)

[lookinforinfo]

Conar, if you are looking for more inspiration with default removal, you could

do worse than take a look at Michael brownes' excellent thread on the contents of the forum -

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/site-questions-suggestions/53182-cant-find-what-youre.html

 

thera are a few sections devoted to the subject including one by Surly Bonds

which I have included below

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/24013-defaults-proposed-method-removal.html

 

Your strongest argument will be that where you no longer have a contract

with the lender [because you have repaid the loan] then the lender has not

got your consent nor a legitimate interst in continuing to process your data.

However I note with concern that the ICO take the view that the CRAs still have a legitimate interest in processing in these cases anyway-because they have a legitimate interest.

If your loan was taken out prior to 1990 and so you would not have had access to the "fair processing" notice as mentioned by Experian, or even if

you did not receive the notice should your loan have been taken out later,

then you can rightfully claim that Experian are processing your data unlawfully. And this overrides their right to process data using the legitimate

interest argument.

[icefall]

Just spotted this thread, looks very interesting.

 

Good luck in your quest op.

[FANTASY CHARGES]

here is a link to that nov 6th 2006

 

statement on credit agreements - data sharing

by THE INFORMATION COMMISIONERS OFFICE

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/72297-information-commissioners-ruling-credit.html

 

 

 

LINK

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documen...%20sharing.pdf

[tifo]

useful ... i am having the same problem with Experian.

[conar686]

Tks for the A_Z link v.v.helpful. I'm a SB fan but its gone v quiet at the mo on that front - perhaps on holiday

 

MAC

[conar686]

Pse see following thread where a couple of numpties did Experians work for them on automatic processing

 

Clearing a default with Experian. . . (1 2)

 

The following is Experians response to my letter above. The bold Mr H has not responded as requested with reference to legal statute so I will now complain to the ICO (I ain't holding my breath).

 

Any Advice on next steps welcome

[conar686]

email from The bold H, still refusing to give legal references to my questions - off to the ICO now for one final attempt to get some answers.

 

I've taken them up on their offer to investigate

 

Dear Mr Hancock

Thank you for your email dated 9 Mar 07 in which you made the following offer, which I now wish to accept

‘I also previously advised that if you believe you have not defaulted and that the information in question is inaccurate I ask that you please clarify why in each instance. I will then also query the accuracy of the specific entry with the company concerned and add a Notice of Dispute alongside the information being queried. To date I have not received a response to this’

Please see the following:

Entries C4, C6-9, C12, C15, C17 & C19

I have made formal requests for information on the above, however to date, these companies have failed to provide me with true-signed copies of the appropriate credit agreement & the alleged default notices.

Please see ‘an example’ of my letter to all companies, in which they have either failed to respond or sent me copies of their standard notice that does not include my name or account reference. I am taking the next steps to get their attention.

As I'm sure you can understand, the burden of proof lies with you to substantiate all information I am contesting (if I am mistaken please tell me how); replying that you can't remove the data because the companies involved have not permitted you to, is not acceptable I will only accept (from you) written proof of the appropriate correspondence & authorities for each & every entry above or that you remove the entry as unsubstantiated.

 

Experian letter - Thank you for your e-mails received 28 February and 4 March 2007.

 

In response to the three points you have raised:

 

a. As I have already advised all our clients sign up to strict terms and conditions within their contract that require them to ensure all their data is accurate prior to providing it to us. Our regulator, the Information Commissioner, considers that this is having taken 'reasonable steps'. I also previously advised that if you believe you have not defaulted and that the information in question is inaccurate I ask that you please clarify why in each instance. I will then also query the accuracy of the specific entry with the company concerned and add a Notice of Dispute alongside the information being queried. To date I have not received a response to this.

 

b. Again, as I have already advised, the Information Commissioner has confirmed that the credit reference agencies do not appear to be in breach of the fifth principle of the Data Protection Act 1998 by retaining account information for a period of six years after the account was last active. Broadly speaking, this principle is designed to make the period for which data is retained something that organisations can define themselves, as long as they can justify their reasons for doing so. We feel that as it was agreed throughout the credit industry and in accordance with the relevant regulatory bodies that six years is an acceptable period to hold account information, that we are fully justified in retaining account data for this period.

 

c. I would refer you to point a) above and would also add that you have previously confirmed that you do hold the accounts in question and have entered into repayment arrangements with the companies concerned.

 

I acknowledge your request under Section 12(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998, that entitles an individual to write to a data controller to require that data controller to ensure that no decision which significantly affects them is made solely by automatic means.

 

I am fully aware of the legislation that you kindly quoted in your letter, which is detailed below for your reference.

 

12. - (1) An individual is entitled at any time, by notice in writing to any data controller, to require the data controller to ensure that no decision taken by or on behalf of the data controller which significantly affects that individual is based solely on the processing by automatic means of personal data in respect of which that individual is the data subject for the purpose of evaluating matters relating to him such as, for example, his performance at work, his creditworthiness, his reliability or his conduct.

 

As a credit reference agency, Experian does not make any automated decisions with regards to your creditworthiness or any of the other criteria that are specified within Section 12(1). Consequently, we do not have to comply with your request to remove the information that we process by automatic means. This is because we are not making any decisions about the information that we obtain and process via automated systems.

 

I have highlighted the relevant part of Section 12(1) that clarifies that it is only when a decision is made by automated processing that you are entitled to have that automated decision reconsidered (s.12(2)(b)).

 

I would like to clarify that our role is to give lenders factual information about you when you apply for credit. This helps lenders as it enables them to review your current and previous credit agreements but also benefits the applicant as they can be granted credit facilities instantly rather than having to prove that they have a good financial history every time they make an application.

 

When a lender asks to see the information we hold, we do not offer any comment or advice. Lenders use the information we give them, along with the information you give on a credit application form, to help them decide whether or not to lend. We are not told if the information we have provided has affected the lending decision or, in fact, what that decision is.

 

If you have been declined for financial services and the lender concerned confirms that the decision was made via an automated process then you do have the right to appeal against that decision and request that your application is manually reviewed.

 

You may wish to quote the legislation you referred to in your letter in support of any request that you may make to a lender for a manual assessment. Furthermore, you may also like to note that if you add an explanatory statement to your credit report, this will automatically mean that your credit application must be manually viewed prior to completion of any automated assessment.

 

You can add a short explanatory statement to your report to make sure that future lenders are aware of your comments. This is called a 'Notice of Correction'. Anyone looking at your report in the future will see your comments and should take them into account before making a lending decision.

 

If you would like to add a 'Notice of Correction' to your credit report, please let us know the exact wording you would like to use. We cannot add a statement that is longer than 200 words or one that we think is defamatory, frivolous, scandalous or unsuitable for publication for some other reason.

 

It is also stipulated within Section 5 (Principles of Decision-Making) of 'The Guide to Credit Scoring 2000', that the applicant can appeal for a manual decision to be made if they have been declined purely by means of an automated scoring process.

 

You might wish to view 'The Guide to Credit Scoring 2000', in particular Section 5-7, if you wish to see this in full. You can find this on the Experian website at:

 

www.experian.co.uk/corporate/compliance/creditscoring

 

We believe that your threat of legal action is without merit. Consequently, if you do choose to issue proceedings we will instruct our solicitors to apply to strike out your case and we will seek to reclaim the costs incurred in doing so.

 

If you have any further queries, please feel free to contact me directly either by e-mail at [email protected], by telephone on 0115 9055453 or by writing to me at the following address:

 

Directors' Office, Experian Ltd, PO Box 8000, Nottingham, NG80 7WF

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

 

Mr L J Hancock

Consumer Compliance Executive

Directors' Office