UK26 -V- Experian Limited

[south east]

This is a very interesting thread and I admire your courage. I would add that Mr Mills is well aware that his attempts to apply pressure to you by sending you emails and contacting you by telephone is a clear attempt on his behalf to side step Judicial Procedure. I would suggest that Mr Mills is well aware that he must comply with Judicial Procedure and therefore must place any requests he (Experian) has in writing on headed letter paper. It would appear that Mr Mills is acting as a bullyboy worm on the end of fishing rod merely fishing for information , as no doubt Mr Mills is well aware that under procedure he must outline in any request for further information he has on headed letter paper and such written request to be sent by post. In addition I would suggest Mr Mills is well aware he must outline clearly in writing his reasons for asking for any and all information.

 

Insist all requests from Experian in respect of this legal issue are made in writing on headed paper and sent by post, request all letters sent are done so by recorded delivery and ensure any response you make is also sent recorded delivery. Experian have a legal duty to inform you why they want information from you and for what purpose, if they do not state this clearly in any correspondance you receive from them, then write back stating they have not made clear their reasons for requesting information and clearly point out that they are legally obliged to state why they are they requesting certain information from you, on what grounds and for what purpose.

 

Experian maybe used to acting as in a dismissive manner in which they choose in respect of consumers but they are more then aware of their legal obligations under Judicial Procedings and may wish to reel their finshing rod in...

 

Keep a file or file with all the correspondance in it and any court papers servide by you or by Experian and set the file/s into sections, mark each section with a heading and when the file is complete and a court date is set, make a copy of the file for your pusrpose and provide the court with a copy of the file. Make a third copy file for Experian but you will not need to provide them with this file until the court informs you. Experian also have to provide you with file copies of and and all documentation they will be using. You should receive this before the court date and go through the file with a fine tooth comb, make notes against information you believe or know is untrue and gather any firther information you can to prove your case to the Court. If you need to submit information on or just before the Court Hearing date make sure you provide Experian with copies.

 

I wish you all the very best and should you be sucessful then I hope the matter of the CRA's will be taken for application for Judicial Review in the Public Interest.

[humbleman]

UK26

 

any progress

[UK26]

not yet, i'm waiting a date for trail now

[Sparkie1723]

Hi UK 26 and all,

I've been digging and have found this in the New Credit Act amendments... my reading of this must include CRA's, I've done a search of the OFT public Register of credit licenses and it appears ( I may be wrong) but my search showed they have not got a license,

anyone any views on this????

If I'm right the this will help UK 26 in his fight.

CRA's are now advertising loans and such stuff as apply here get a quote . Compare loan rates etc.

CRA's provide credit information Services in fact they are the main suppliers of information about the financial status of us all.

 

Section 25: Credit information services

55. Section 25 amends section 145 of the 1974 Act to include provision of ‘credit information services’ as a type of ancillary credit business. ‘Credit information services’ covers those businesses that help individuals to locate and correct records relating to their financial standing held by credit reference agencies and others in the credit and hire industries. As a consequence, people providing credit information services as part of their business will need to be licensed.

Edited December 11, 2008 by Sparkie1723

[lonerider]

UK 26

 

You have my full respect and your standards and morals are without question. Its a shame the defendent does not have those same attributes.

 

an Embarrasment to the industry

Keep us updated please

[andys999]

CREDIT AGENCYS set up some 25 years ago via stealth through only 1 commissioners report.

The worrying thing is hardly anyne overseas them,-only a very weak oft has a few rules.

FSA has nothing to do with them,commissionrs office passes the buck to oft.

I found out ANYONE like estate agencys can start up a credit agency without even a credit licence,as they so called "only gather data"

some jobsworth should shut down this immoral activity-and all companies handling credit should revert back to affordabilty i.e view bank statements ect without the need to consult these [EDIT] !!

Edited December 26, 2008 by Rooster-UK
Libellous comment removed

[upto the eyeballs]

subbing, excellent work, good luck:D

[cresswell80]

sub... good luck!

[100ian]

Sub - happy hunting !!!

[web2dude]

Brilliantly done. Best of luck - I can't wait for the outcome.....!

[UK26]

update

 

 

Edited January 16, 2009 by UK26

[kiptower]

cost you another £300 then Dave ?

[UK26]

Due to the amount of work involved in this.

 

I am thinking to file Discontinuance, as a resault of the HFO Case

[UK26]

Yes to take experian court it will cost me in excess of £1000

 

cost you another £300 then Dave ?

[kiptower]

but the other side is if you win ( and your almost there ) you get it back,

 

dont let the barstewarts get you down

[mcuth]

as a resault of the HFO Case

 

Which one's this?

 

Cheers

Michael

[manchester1]

Subbing , Best of luck

[cadencealex]

It is a shame to back down now

 

Has anyone else taken them to Court and won?

[scampy]

Hi UK26

 

I will BACS you £10 to contribute to the costs , if we get 100 caggers investing £10 in your case then all your costs are paid? Whats you bank acc number or would you prefer a cheque for security reasons? Send me a PM .

 

Lets see if we get enough caggers to fight experian and raise £1k.

 

Or as i have always sUspected are the brits too compliant, deferential and submissive to their so called "superiors" is it the royal family spin doctors who have made most people in UK subservient?

 

If we lived in Spain or France do you think we would get £10 donations very quickly and or would their nationals just get a JCB and bulldoze the HQ of experian?

 

And knock on the doors of their local MP's (equivalent of) at 2 am and demand action against illegal activities of DCA's, or maybe visit in their hundreds the offices of Capquest and other DCA,s and use direct action to close the "unfit illegal actions of" DCA's?

 

In UK we eat too much cucumber sandwiches and drink our tea and rely on petitions which are a load of boll***s as far as getting things changed n UK.

 

What do you think?

[cadencealex]

Hi UK26

 

I will BACS you £10 to contribute to the costs , if we get 100 caggers investing £10 in your case then all your costs are paid? Whats you bank acc number or would you prefer a cheque for security reasons? Send me a PM .

 

Lets see if we get enough caggers to fight experian and raise £1k.

 

Or as i have always sUspected are the brits too compliant, deferential and submissive to their so called "superiors" is it the royal family spin doctors who have made most people in UK subservient?

 

If we lived in Spain or France do you think we would get £10 donations very quickly and or would their nationals just get a JCB and bulldoze the HQ of experian?

 

And knock on the doors of their local MP's (equivalent of) at 2 am and demand action against illegal activities of DCA's, or maybe visit in their hundreds the offices of Capquest and other DCA,s and use direct action to close the "unfit illegal actions of" DCA's?

 

In UK we eat too much cucumber sandwiches and drink our tea and rely on petitions which are a load of boll***s as far as getting things changed n UK.

 

What do you think?

 

I was going to suggest we all donate, however wasn't sure whether it would be welcome.

 

I will BACS £10 also and if we all did we could pay the fee - so you haven't lost out

 

I really think you should keep going with this one.. shame we couldn't all come to Court and see it

[Barclaysbunny]

Hi

Just read through all of this, VERY impressed. I, for one, will send you £20 if you want. PM me and I'll provide you with a postal order - I would absolutely hate it if you got this far and had to back down.

 

As far as the case goes, here are a few thoughts from me:

In the Pt 18 he was asking you to confirm/deny the account & debt. As far as evidence law goes, a claimant has the burden of proof. HOWEVER, you are not making a claim of fact (such as suing someone for personal injury) you are making a claim for an Order (that they remove their data etc) and as such, the burden of proof would lie with them, otherwise the court would, in effect, be requiring you to prove a negative, which is not possible (ie. it would have the effect of you having to prove the debt doesn't exist, which is not possible, you would only be able to prove it DID). So, I would, if I were you, provide the court with a written submission (obviously given to the nice little Mr Mills at least a week before) that the burden of proof (that their data is in fact true, as such that the debt exists) is in this case reversed, and is placed upon them, not you. It is simply enough for you to require them to prove their data is correct. I would be happy to knock up a submission that can then be edited by brainiacs on here. I will do some research on lexis to prove the point (I don't have my evidence law books any more, sadly).

Mr Mills' Pt 18 questionnaire was a lame attempt to provide the court with evidence that the debt existed and as such your case should be dismissed. I would like to think that the District Judge will think it was acceptable of them to ask, but just as acceptable of you not to answer.

I would push the court into setting the questions:-

1. What evidence does the Defendant have for allowing this data to be made available? You obviously can't answer this, only they can.

2. What evidence was collected to prove that the data entry was correct? To not verify the data is potentially libellous - and as we all know (and where I will find precedents) that the burden of proof is reversed in libel (again, because a claimant cannot prove a negative).

3. To what extent has the Defendant given consideration to the laws of libel, data protection and Article 8 Human Rights convention? Because to have failed to have complied with these very basics of law will not only leave them open to further claims, but would leave Mr Mills and his office open to a complaint to the Law Society for numerous grievances.

 

And, as we know from their Pt 18, they could not answer these questions. Additionally, providing them with a written submission on this point (ergo showing them that you will not just go into court and be cowed into silence by the might of Mr Mills and his law books) will, in my opinion, push them very quickly into settling this for a significant sum, as well as complying with your original request. On the libel issue, which you'd only bring up in telephone calls, would be worth roughly £60K+ - and yes, I would mention bringing this up in court – it’ll frighten them.

 

As to your compensation point - I would not make any statements to the court on the point (as to exact figures), and only state, where applicable, that you would like the court to use its discretion as to this point. That will unnerve the Defendant, as you will of course have mentioned further consideration for compensation (libel etc). It also allows a judge to set a large sum should you end up in court (having paid through the nose to get there) and s/he takes the view that the Defendant has attempted to rely on bullying tactics, including demanding you issue where they very clearly should have just amended the data entry in the first place, and does stop you looking like you're bringing a claim for money, as opposed to the very real view that you have brought it ONLY to get the damn data removed in the first place. It does, however, have the downside that the judge can make a lower figure if s/he believes you should never have brought it even if you win.

 

Anyway - please don't give up. If you would like me to start some research into the burden of proof point, and would find receiving cash assistance, do let me know - I would be more than happy to help. Chin up, it's a long road, but it will be very worth-while in the end.

Edited January 16, 2009 by Barclaysbunny
facts

[gazzacb]

Ultimately, the Data Controller (Experian) have to face the consequences of their persistence to post innacurate data.

 

I take my hat off to you UK26, and keep up the fight.

 

I, and many others would be only too happy to put money in the kitty.

 

*Puts popcorn in microwave*

 

 

EDIT -

 

Also, interesting to note that Experian carry out XXX checks to ensure tha accuracy of their data, surely you have the right for them to disclose the checks they state in their counterclaim, and facing that daunting proposition may be enough for them to concede defeat.

[spark1]

Experian - will use the argument they are only processing data and :

 

all of our clients are required to sign up to strict terms and conditions within their contract to ensure all their data is accurate and compliant prior to providing it to us. Our regulator, the Information Commissioner, considers that this is having taken 'reasonable steps' to ensure that the information we hold is correct and processed in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998

[Sparkie1723]

Experian - will use the argument they are only processing data and :

 

all of our clients are required to sign up to strict terms and conditions within their contract to ensure all their data is accurate and compliant prior to providing it to us. Our regulator, the Information Commissioner, considers that this is having taken 'reasonable steps' to ensure that the information we hold is correct and processed in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998

 

This does not mean that a Judge would take the same view...especially when the legal guidance given by the ICO states that "data controllers will have take more than reasonable steps, these steps will depend on each situation and how it affects the data subject" or words to this. effect.

sparkie

[spark1]

Sparkie

 

I fully agree with you a judge is needed to help change the way credit reference agencies and the Information Commissioners Office interpretate the Data Protection Act

 

If that ever happens, the flood gates will open

 

Spark