How 'truthful' do CRA records have to be?

[harrassed senior]

Late last year I made formal complaints to Experian about entries on my Credit File. As many of you probably already know the 'headings' have changed and now show, for instance:

 

Credit Card from 'xxxxDCA'

 

Loan from 'xxxxDCA'

 

Bank Account with 'xxxxDCA'

 

Now, whilst I fully understand that the xxxDCA may well own the debt through purchase, surely it is wrong to represent themselves as the original grantor of the Credit?

 

I am still awaiting a response from Experian since they acknowledged my individual complaints in October 2010, but I have today received an answer from the ICO to whom I also complained, and they are quite happy with this state of affairs!!

 

Now maybe I am just being pedantic, but I want any public records held with my personal information to be truthful and factually correct and I do not believe these CRA files are factually correct.

 

Not all of the 'offending' DCAs own the debts, some are only acting as 'agents' either for the OC or another DCA, so surely they should not be shown as the originating creditor?

 

Whilst on this subject, I know OCs often mark the files as settled when they sell on, but I have at least 2 which have second entries with a DCA showing a default date as the date the account was marked as settled by the Oc, is this incorrect also.

 

I would be interested in anyones' opinions on this.

[harrassed senior]

Just a gentle

[unclebulgaria67]

What is the purpose of the record held by the CRA and who are they principally of benefit to ?

 

I think the CRA will argue that the record is to inform who is currently dealing with the debt and not the original creditor.

[inkslinger]

What is the purpose of the record held by the CRA and who are they principally of benefit to ?

 

I think the CRA will argue that the record is to inform who is currently dealing with the debt and not the original creditor.

 

While I see your point, surely whomever is dealing with the debt knows the situation. I see this mearly as another way of a DCA to punish someone in trouble. I cant see any other way of looking at what they do other than as leverage. This isnt going to change without legislation and unfortunately I just dont see that coming at all. Theres a lot of bluster and talk and frankly far too many toothless organisations doing very little to help the common man. If I look at CRA and DCA and the punishment they are capable of inflicting then look at criminal actions you get some sort of perspective. Six years punishment is way way to long for someone who may have fallen into hard times due to divorce or illness, yet I see **** of the earth doing some horrible things to people in society and getting a six month suspended sentence. We seem to have it all back to front.

 

Sorry If iv jumped onto this thread, sometimes it feels a little better to get these things off your chest, especially when Im sitting at home going through legal papers for the twentieth time.

 

Regards

 

M

[unclebulgaria67]

Don't get me started on CRA's that operate around the world, otherwise you will be in for a very long post, which will cure any insomnia.

 

In short CRA's have become part of a corruptive financial system that has crippled the worlds economy. Rather than being independent custodians of accurate information, they are now operating in a way that is not in the interest of either the financial sector or consumers.

[postggj]

if an account (credit card) for example is taken over by a dca, the dca cant call it a credit card account as a dca does not allow facilities for a credit card

 

a dca does not issue a credit card

 

a default is 30 days after missing a contractual payment

 

a dca cannot mark the sale date as default if the original creditor has defaulted prior to sale to a dca

[harrassed senior]

Thanks to all who have thus far replied, thanks PG certainly helps with deciding what action to take.

 

Thanks Ink a very heartfelt post, and one I agree with entirely

 

Thanks UB for your thoughts, again very hearfelt.

[inkslinger]

Don't get me started on CRA's that operate around the world, otherwise you will be in for a very long post, which will cure any insomnia.

 

In short CRA's have become part of a corruptive financial system that has crippled the worlds economy. Rather than being independent custodians of accurate information, they are now operating in a way that is not in the interest of either the financial sector or consumers.

 

Hmmmmm what does that leave then? in there own interests? and there we have the crux of it. I think CRA's have a valid place in society, a well ran and properly governed society. Anything with a clear reliance to the running of the financial sector and that can so clearly damage reputations and lives should never ever, ever be ran for profit. We dont need three CRA's. We need one, properly ran, properly governed, independent, with a voted panel that has no biase to either side, ran without a profit based motif. Otherwise its never going to change. All I can see in what goes on is corruption, greed and frankly the lowest common denominator in life again gets p**sed on from a great height. Oh dear, there I go off on one again............... I think a cup of coffee and ten minutes away from my computer would do me good.

[dadofholly]

Don't get me started on CRA's that operate around the world, otherwise you will be in for a very long post, which will cure any insomnia.

 

In short CRA's have become part of a corruptive financial system that has crippled the worlds economy. Rather than being independent custodians of accurate information, they are now operating in a way that is not in the interest of either the financial sector or consumers.

 

Dead On.

 

And whats worse is that more and more companies want to do credit checks as part of the recruitment process, (I counted 3 in my local paper this week - and have previously applied then withdrawn applications to two more. None of these were for cash handling or financial services.)

 

Some of them do not even do a CRB check along side it. (Obviously been sold some spin by the CRA's - who no doubt charge for the info).

 

So it apears it is more of a crime to be in debt that to be a criminal - i am in the process of trying to get answers as to why this is - and on what statistics the info is based.

 

This kind of thing must be stopped - and it will only be stopped if enough people complain about it.