challenging the CRA's-have we all missed something?

[PGH7447]

SCHEDULE 2 Conditions relevant for purposes of the first principle: processing of any personal data

 

1 The data subject has given his consent to the processing.

2 The processing is necessary—

(a) for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is a party, or

(b) for the taking of steps at the request of the data subject with a view to entering into a contract.

3 The processing is necessary for compliance with any legal obligation to which the data controller is subject, other than an obligation imposed by contract.

4 The processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject.

5 The processing is necessary—

(a) for the administration of justice,

(b) for the exercise of any functions conferred on any person by or under any enactment,

© for the exercise of any functions of the Crown, a Minister of the Crown or a government department, or

(d) for the exercise of any other functions of a public nature exercised in the public interest by any person.

6 (1) 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 are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.

(2) The Secretary of State may by order specify particular circumstances in which this condition is, or is not, to be taken to be satisfied.

[dannyboy660]

Experian was an offshoot of GUS (Great Universal Home Shopping)

 

GUS controlled much of the data from various catalogues, ie who lives where, who owes what to whom for quite a considerable time behind the scenes...they basically oversaw the running and collections of various catalogues accounts. They used to make sure applications for catalogue credit were checked out, and then the ensuing accounts/collections ran smoothly. At one time virtually every household had a catalogue of some kind so imagine the amount of info they had!!! Applications for catalogues used to have (in the small print) the revelation that all your data was being recorded and held whether or not you were granted credit. And then banks caught on..........

 

Lo and behold, an enormous data/information collection agency was born which other lending institutions began to make use of, and so this b*****d child became seperated from GUS and into Experian group. In the interests of 'fair play' and to ensure Experian did not have a monopoly in this information paradise, other companies with a similar purpose were set up (Equifax, t'other one who's name escapes me).

 

Because this made it so much easier to keep track of the ordinary peasantry, other creditors began to write into their contractual small print things about sharing data with CRA's.

 

 

Aha...PG's come up with something interesting by the look of it.....

[lickthewallfatboy]

A number of complainants have written to Experian stating that information relating to accounts they have held with credit providers should no longer be held. The complaints maintain that Experian only have permission to hold account information for the duration of a credit agreement and that once the agreement ends so does the consent to process information about it.

 

 

and when is a credit agreement not a credit agreement,and a creditor not a creditor?

 

when it's a GIFT!!!!

 

isn't this the crux of it all?

[dannyboy660]

...and of course, the other side of the coin is why waste time and money storing all those paper Credit Applications when someone else is keeping the information for you.........

[lickthewallfatboy]

bet they're regretting that decision!!

[Blondmusic]

I think it is about time we challenged them too. They hold loads of data on people then charge us for the priviledge of seeing our own info! I must have missed something here.

 

I'm Subbing!!

[PGH7447]

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/introductory/data_protection_-_when_and_how_to_complain.pdf

 

if you want to complain

[PGH7447]

I think these two sections cover their arses

 

Part II Rights of data subjects and others

 

Right to prevent processing likely to cause damage or distress

(1) Subject to subsection (2), an individual is entitled at any time by notice in writing to a data controller to require the data controller at the end of such period as is reasonable in the circumstances to cease, or not to begin, processing, or processing for a specified purpose or in a specified manner, any personal data in respect of which he is the data subject, on the ground that, for specified reasons—

(a) the processing of those data or their processing for that purpose or in that manner is causing or is likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to him or to another, and

(b) that damage or distress is or would be unwarranted.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply

in a case where any of the conditions in paragraphs 1 to 4 of Schedule 2 is met, or

(b) in such other cases as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State by order.

 

SCHEDULE 2 Conditions relevant for purposes of the first principle: processing of any personal data

1 The data subject has given his consent to the processing. This is what they rely on, when you apply for credit you sign to say that they can process your request

2 The processing is necessary—

(a) for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is a party, or

(b) for the taking of steps at the request of the data subject with a view to entering into a contract.

3 The processing is necessary for compliance with any legal obligation to which the data controller is subject, other than an obligation imposed by contract.

4 The processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject.

[joemay]

subbing

[mr.ton]

Well nice to know that they read this forum

Of course they are bound to disagree, its their mindset that has built up with them over the years - so it wont be easily changed overnight.

I would just like to correct them on something though....we are not saying that its illegal to hold information after the file has closed, we are suggesting that it is illegal for you to hold any information in the 1st place.

Please rectify that on your site as soon as you read this thank you very much Experian

[mr.ton]

www.howtocomplain.com

[lickthewallfatboy]

I don't think it covers their arse if what they are processing isn't deemed to be credit-just IMHO of course

 

and the application form for which there is no credit agreement was an application for a gift....maybe that's stretching it a bit but you see what I mean.

 

anyway,if I apply for something and don't get it,what gives some other prick the right to record that application?

 

I still think they are processing data about a gift if they can't produce a CCA

Edited July 14, 2009 by lickthewallfatboy

[mr.ton]

To be fair...this will be a very tough nut to crack in my opinion.

We have fired the starting gun,so thats a beginning - but it would take ages/years for anything to ever change.

Like ive said - the whole financial industry (DCA's & CRA's) & the many myths surrounding them, have been built up over so many years/even decades?

So it would take just as long for it all to go full circle the other way so to speak...

Still at least we've started & the industry is taking note

[lickthewallfatboy]

I don't disagree with that one

 

did we have some "visitors" earlier then?

 

Look what it took though for the banks and CC's to crumble in the first wave of bank charges skirmishes-did anyone think they would keel over so easily before CAG started?

 

I think this whole can of worms needs urgent attention from CAG-I'd love to wipe the smug grins off their faces......

[bigandyuk1]

Shame its not as simple as withdrawing consent to process our data !!

[mr.ton]

Come to think of it - if the banks & the DCA's can crumble thanks to sites like CAG - then im sure the CRA's will be a pushover

[mr.ton]

did we have some "visitors" earlier then?

 

Never let it be said that we dont have "industry insiders" keeping an eye out

[babybear39]

Never let it be said that we dont have "industry insiders" keeping an eye out

 

And that we greet them and treat them nice

[mr.ton]

2 guests having a nose in now

[SURFBOY]

I think one of the CAG regulars has a very interesting battle going on with a CRA right now (UK26).

[babybear39]

Yes.

[lickthewallfatboy]

I've been reading around a bit,and I saw a paper by a lecturer at Leeds University School of Law-FEDERICO FERRETTI Avvocato, School of Law, University of Leeds

 

he states that the "implied consent" claimed by CRA's is in fact nothing short of "enforced consent" -

 

It is worthy to anticipate already at this stage, for instance, that it seems the case that consumers do not have much choice if they do not want to be refused credit. The consumer's consent with regard to the searches to be carried out in the CRAs’ databases, in fact, seems to be viewed both mandatory and assumed (i.e. implied consent). Lenders say that the lack of such consent would impede them from taking the credit application any further. No consent, no credit (i.e. enforced consent).

(emphasis mine)

Moreover, lenders make it a condition of the credit contract that at a later stage they have the right to pass the information concerning such specific credit line to CRAs, which in turn have the right to to disseminate the same to their client members, such clause seeming to be not negotiable although although alien to the decision of the granting of credit (that has already been taken positively). Again, it seems that no agreement to such clause means that there will be no contract.

[lickthewallfatboy]

so we have to examine also the legality of "enforced consent"

[lickthewallfatboy]

hello there,you guests you

[sosumi]

Am here, but not properly...

However, look at this folks - Experian's not doing too well

Experian targets new business...