CAG CRA S.A.R Club

[babybear39]

OMG

 

You've shattered my dreams now ODC

[vselym]

Hi folks, great thread, and apologies if this is in wrong place, but.....

 

My current dilemma, potted history first

Declared Bankrupt May 2002

Annulled April 2004

 

Firstly i shall read from the good book of Experian,

 

"CreditExpert" (ppllleease!) entry under "Public Records" heading, reads

 

Name and address: ***************(Mine)

Information type : Bankruptcy Order

Date : 01/05/02

Satisfaction Date : 04/2005

Source : London Gazette

Note : When your bankruptcy has been annulled or discharged we will be informed by the Insolvency Service

 

Now i quote from the Insolvency Service's factsheet "Information on annulment of a bankruptcy order"

 

Page 6

"What is the effect of the annulment of a bankruptcy order ?"

"An annulment has the effect in law that the bankruptcy was never made. You will revert to your pre-bankruptcy status"

 

"The following paragraphs explain what will happen to public records of your bankruptcy"

"The Insolvency Service's Individual Insolvency Register - The Individual Insolvency Register contains records of bankruptcy orders and individual voluntary arrangements in England and Wales.......If a bankruptcy is annulled the record of the order will be removed from the register immediately"

 

Page 8

"Credit Reference Agencies - the official receiver does not send any form of notice to credit reference agencies."

and goes on to say,

"It is your responsibility to have details of the bankruptcy removed from your credit file if your file is not updated"

 

 

 

Now, yes i now know it is my responsibility ultimately to update Experian, but would like to ask anyones opinion on the following,

 

1. Experians "Note" on my file clearly states that the Insolvency Service will notify them, surely given the Insolvency Service factsheet, a downright lie ?

 

2. Does anyone know how or indeed if there is a notice i can threaten to serve on them, with a time frame for removal, rather than the inevitable and protracted round of letters Experian will rely on to make me give up ?

 

Any thoughts welcome

 

vselym

[patrickq1]

i think it would be advisable if you do have a copy of your anulments to send copies to all the CRAs asking them all to remove all references of the data held concerning you and the bankruptcy/anulment ,they may say it will take time about four weeks or so,then re check and if not removed then you are entitled to prosecute them under the DPAact...you will also find that if you have a word with the person or persons who made the bankruptcy order and ask them for copies of who they have contacted ..as exper will only say it must have been a mistake they made ,sadly you will find the letters and long protracted way is the only way to safeguard yourself and put things right.make sure everything is recorded by post etc.imo

[vselym]

Thanks Patrick, but i was thinking along the lines of an S.10, as can be found in the templates folder. That relates to defaults registered against bank charges, but think that as the information is no longer in the public domain, they shouldn't be allowed to process it, its defamation of character and has seriously affected my credit rating, just not sure how it should be worded

 

vselym

[car2403]

Your issue initially is with the recording agent - if you have proof that the information is wrong, or should be removed because it has expired, (note, I think it stays on your file, just isn't visible on new searches) you can then challenge the CRA as Partick suggests.

 

If they don't concede your argument, then you can get in to the s.10 (and probably s.12) discussions - you may want to include these notices in your dispute letter though, given they say up to 8 weeks to resolve.

[sillygirl1]

I agree with Car2403 that the records 'stay on your file but aren't visible' and that is why an SAR to Experian will reveal a whole web of linked information - sometimes on the most tenuous of 'linked' data.

[vselym]

Thanks again

 

but if the effect of an annulment is to return my status to pre bankruptcy, and the Insolvency Service register REMOVES the record then how or who pronounces a CRA judge, jury and executioner by allowing it to stay on my file, whether seen or not ?

 

My annulment also states that the original bankruptcy petition, is dismissed.

 

I will be SAR'ing Experian, aswell as trying to get this REMOVED from my file, but i don't want to waste even 2 weeks in waffle letters !

 

I will reread the DPA, especially S.12, thanks car, and if its ok will post a draft for perusal

 

regards

vselym

[car2403]

vselym, I think you're under the impression that this will be easier than it actually will be? These CRA's are a law unto themselves and until you call them to account, probably escalating the issue to a Court claim in the process, you're unlikely to get anywhere.

 

Having said that, there is still a process you must follow to achieve what you want - that will include writing letters, waiting and waiting and waiting for replies, then replying again and waiting and waiting and waiting some more. At this point you might get to Court and be able to force removal.

 

A SAR is a good place to start, but you need to send one of these to CallCredit and Equifax as well - Experian is only 1 of 3 CRA's.

 

Bucking the system by not following the correct (pre-litigation!) process may cause you issues later and ultimately drag out the process further.

 

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but unless you can get them to acknowledge they are wrong, this is going to be a long drawn out affair, I'm afraid.

[vselym]

Again thanks car2403,

please don't misunderstand me, i am fully aware of the game the cra's are playing ! We're bigger than you and can type longer letters etc.

I'm not coming from a standpoint of trying to beat the system, merely cover all my bases in the first letter such that the clock starts ticking the moment the letter lands on their desk. That gives them less room for manouevre on the delaying tactics they employ with us, the "unwashed masses" (i'm sure Surlybonds has that copyrighted by now !)

 

Am just throwing this out there so as to be sure i haven't missed something vital

 

Regards

vselym

[car2403]

There's an easy way to avoid that, vselym, and that is to not reply to their replies! Give them what you want, if you don't get it you will consider legal action, then hit them with an LBA before starting your claim - I agree long, protracted conversations probably won't get you anywhere...

[vselym]

car2403

read your default thread last night, and see now why you advised a lengthy process was inevitable, however, although i may be over simplifieing my case, there is no issue of agreements being un/enforceable. i have an annulment and their data is wrong, simple as ! i have also now got in my head an argument that says i have never given them (cra's) implied or otherwise, authority to process such data as a bankruptcy

 

regards

vselym

[car2403]

Great you understand the background now, vselym, but I think you REALLY need to start your own thread on this as it isn't as simple as you've stated I'm afraid. Your assuming that the CRA's require your consent to process data, but they claim that they don't AND they have the support of the Information Commissioners Office in this argument.

 

I'm not going to go further with this on this thread, as it's way off topic, but if you want to start your own thread and post a link here I'll explain more on your own thread.

 

Thanks,

Chris

[vselym]

car2403

Help please, im stuck !

i hope this works, agree was way off topic, but am also gonna sar the cra's so will keep looking here for info.

Any help greatly appreciated

regards

vselym

[car2403]

I think that should be;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/121652-help-please-im-stuck.html

[FANTASY CHARGES]

I think Experian are aiming to monopolise the information file 'market'. Has anyone been able to draw breath recently without noticing CreditExpert?

My goodness they're everywhere. And just in case people miss the millions of links to Experian's CreditExpert site, they've added a new site, just to link to the same CreditExpert site.

I've just done another Google Search, for 'credit report'. Here they are, the top 2 of the paid listings:

Credit Report for £0

www.Experian.co.uk/creditreport Get your credit report for free with CreditExpert from Experian Free Credit Report

www.creditcheckforFREE.co.uk Get your Experian credit report for £0 at creditcheckforFREE.co.uk

 

Same people, same company, same site. Different smiley faces. Both sending you to CreditExpert.co.uk.

I'm starting to feel sorry (not) for Equifax and CallCredit. Experian are doing a Microsoftly softly...

 

 

 

Bloomberg.com: News

 

DESPERATION IS the word

 

"Experian Drops After Saying Revenue Growth Will Slow (Update2)

 

By Shelley Smith

Nov. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Experian Group Ltd., the world's largest credit-checking company, fell a record 9.5 percent in London trading after saying sales growth will slow.

Experian dropped 45.25 pence to an all-time low of 429.5 pence. The Dublin-based company was spun off from U.K. retailer GUS Plc in October last year and has since declined 23 percent.

Chief Executive Officer Donald Robert expects a ``further slowdown'' in revenue growth in the second half, he said today in a statement. Experian, whose customers include American Express Co. and HSBC Holdings Plc, said the contraction in credit markets in the U.S. and U.K. is hurting demand.

``The tighter credit conditions mean less credit applications,'' Jawaid Afsar, a trader at Securequity Ltd. in Sheffield, England said. ``It could be deemed as a profit warning.''

"

[babybear39]

Awww don't you just feel sorry for them NOT!!!

[sosumi]

Has anybody seen this before? It's from June 2006:

A chancy name to have in Wales

Quote:

... And while Direct Legal & Collections (DLC) may have got the debtor's name right, yours is the most common surname in the whole of Wales.

Curiously though, DLC's demand begins: 'We are unable to accept your offer as we feel it is unrealistic in comparison to the balance outstanding.' So at some point, the debt collectors were in touch with the real debtor at a different address.

I repeatedly invited Experian to comment on what linked you to this debt. Experian said nothing.

DLC itself told me the information from Experian should have been double-checked, but 'on this particular occasion we have not adhered to these strict verification checks'.

I've just come across it. Apologies if it's been quoted before, but I'm gobsmacked by the similarity of this person's case to another - resulting in suicide - just months ago.

 

[2Grumpy]

A bit off topic, but I've just found out that people in the USA are entitled to a free annual credit report under federal law.

 

I wonder if that will ever get implemented over here.

 

Grumpy

[patrickq1]

this is something ive argued about before we should be allowed a full and complete report concerning ourselves free why should experian proffit from me without my say so,it may be possible to take a court action to demand this report this way it would ensure that experian and other CRAs adhere to the strictest code and to the letter of the law concerning data protection

[ODC]

A bit off topic, but I've just found out that people in the USA are entitled to a free annual credit report under federal law.

 

I wonder if that will ever get implemented over here.

 

Grumpy

Hope not. That would open the door to more Phishing letters from the CRAs buddies in the DCAs and loads of unsolicited offers of loans and plastic cards. NO THANKS!!!

[andrew1]

Well if Tony Blair was still in I'd say yes as he seemed to do what Georgie told him to! Otherwise don't hold your breath! Although there has been talk of it from the fall-out of the NHS info going missing - still can't see it happening though automatically.

 

 

Just my Opinion !

 

Sarah

[patrickq1]

it would also put an end to sorn and stop the unfair commercial practices

but i will let the legal bods argue this one

patrickq1(13) In order to achieve the Community's objectives through the removal of internal market barriers, it is necessary to replace Member States' existing, divergent general clauses and legal principles. The single, common general prohibition established by this Directive therefore covers unfair commercial practices distorting consumers' economic behaviour. In order to support consumer confidence the general prohibition should apply equally to unfair commercial practices which occur outside any contractual relationship between a trader and a consumer or following the conclusion of a contract and during its execution. The general prohibition is elaborated by rules on the two types of commercial practices which are by far the most common, namely misleading commercial practices and aggressive commercial practices.

(14) It is desirable that misleading commercial practices cover those practices, including misleading advertising, which by deceiving the consumer prevent him from making an informed and thus efficient choice. In conformity with the laws and practices of Member States on misleading advertising, this Directive classifies misleading practices into misleading actions and misleading omissions. In respect of omissions, this Directive sets out a limited number of key items of information which the consumer needs to make an informed transactional decision. Such information will not have to be disclosed in all advertisements, but only where the trader makes an invitation to purchase, which is a concept clearly defined in this Directive. The full harmonisation approach adopted in this Directive does not preclude the Member States from specifying in national law the main characteristics of particular products such as, for example, collectors' items or electrical goods, the omission of which would be material when an invitation to purchase is made. It is not the intention of this Directive to reduce consumer choice by prohibiting the promotion of products which look similar to other products unless this similarity confuses consumers as to the commercial origin of the product and is therefore misleading. This Directive should be without prejudice to existing Community law which expressly affords Member States the choice between several regulatory options for the protection of consumers in the field of commercial practices. In particular, this Directive should be without prejudice to Article 13(3) of Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector [7].

[andrew1]

Hope not. That would open the door to more Phishing letters from the CRAs buddies in the DCAs and loads of unsolicited offers of loans and plastic cards. NO THANKS!!!

 

Oh come on ODC, you know how you feel so left out when you don't get post ! :D

[Allwood]

Has anyone S.A.R Equifax as I am thinking of sending one to them when I get back a reply from my S.A.R. to Barclaycard.

[andrew1]

Has anyone S.A.R Equifax as I am thinking of sending one to them when I get back a reply from my S.A.R. to Barclaycard.

 

Expect about 2000 pages