Concerning having a default removed has anyone ever used the FOS OR THE ICO and been successful?

[madtergee16]

I ask this question based on a telephone conversation I had with the office of the ICO. I was, informed they only offer guideline on how acompany should conduct their business based on tradition and what seen as best practice. That does not mean companies have to follow any of the guideline, after all they are only guidelines not LAW. Therefore, my question, what enforcement powers, do the ICO have?

 

The same question was, put to the FOS.

 

I spoke to a solicitor regarding this, and his advice was.

 

“Unless you have more money than sense you will not proceed”. He explained, to prove the lender has broken any laws, I will have to go to court to get a judgement. “ what the lenders are hopping, most people who have a default , have some financial problems , therefore financial they are not in a position to take the lender to court, cost of court fees, solicitors fees at £170 -£185 per hour.”

 

The FOS will only enforce the removal of those defaults from CRA, if you can prove at no time were you ever in default or you had two defaults for the same account.

 

It is not the job of the lender to keep track of us; (moving home, changing telephone number) it is our job to inform them of our movements. In addition, our job to keep track of our accounts at all time, to say you did not know your account was in arrears, will not go down well in court.

 

The bottom-line was if your account was in default, the Judge normally rules in favour of the lender. Ignorance of our own financial situation at the time of the default is not a defence.

 

I thought, to share this with you people. I am looking for case studies about defaults where the FOS or ICO were involved. It would be nice to know how the percentage wins for on both side?

[cerberusalert]

If they have entered a default on your credit file erroneously it is a breach of the Data Protection Act which is law and which the ICO are responsible to enforce. Also it could also be a cause for a civil action for libel.

[madtergee16]

You saying, the same thing I am saying. To have any chance of removing a defaultnotice, you have to prove it was, entered incorrectly. Being unaware that youhad a debt will not be enough to argue for it s removal.

In my case, I accept the debt; in fact, the debt was, settled fully in 2009.However, I do not believe they followed the correction procedure when enteringthe default in 2007 on CRA.

[cerberusalert]

Before they can enter the default they must send you a default notice which gives you the opportunity to remedy, however if they sent it to a previous address & you never notified them of a new one you would find it difficult to get them to remove it. They may do it as a goodwill gesture

 

The ICO could make them if they were in error, but by the time they got around to that it would be around two years down the line by which time it will have fallen off your credit report anyhow.

[madtergee16]

I have been at the same address. They do not have copy of or record of sending default notice. They sent me a "recreation" of what yhe defalut notice would have looked like. To me that is not correct.

[cerberusalert]

In that case they cannot prove that one was ever sent.

 

Have you made an official complaint to the ICO?

[madtergee16]

I have been at the same address. They do not have copy of or record of sending default notice. They sent me a "recreation" of what yhe defalut notice would have looked like. To me that is not correct.

[madtergee16]

The reply from ICO. This comes under the CCA, and I should contact the FOS. They in turn will act on the ruling given by the FOS.

[madtergee16]

Thats why i ask the question. what is rhe point of the ICO. Read my post at start of this topic.

[supasta1]

If they have entered a default on your credit file erroneously it is a breach of the Data Protection Act which is law and which the ICO are responsible to enforce. Also it could also be a cause for a civil action for libel.

 

Has anyone actually successfully taken the 'Libel' route against a CRA and won??

 

I am looking to do this and would be very interested, what sort of damages would you normally be looking at??

 

I have just had 2 defaults successfully removed from my credit file with Natwest and am in the process of challanging another one from Shop Direct that I am fairly confident about.... Unfortunately you have to do all the leg work yourself as none of the regulatory bodies seem to be much use.

[supasta1]

http://www.independent.co.uk/money/spend-save/questions-of-cash-credit-data-libel-action-may-well-be-wrong-call-7499767.html

 

Interesting little article about using libel against CRA's

[cerberusalert]

You can claim damages for injury to your credit rating as per the case of Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119. Average compensation is £1k per incorrect default.

[supasta1]

You can claim damages for injury to your credit rating as per the case of Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119. Average compensation is £1k per incorrect default.

 

Was it not the default balance plus £1000 in the above case or am i not remembering it very well??

 

What about the durkin case where it was £8000 for the damage to his credit worthiness??

 

I am concerned if you have to prove you have been damaged first? My damage is purely being refused credit but in the above article experian claim that being refused credit is not classed as being damaged??

[ShaneG2009]

I have complained to both organisations about an incorrect default on my file and both have sided with the organisation i complained about.

 

Although the responses were unfavourable i wouldnt change the way i've dealt with my complaint because at least when i file a court claim they will see that i have tried every possible angle to resolve my complaint.

 

My impression of both organisations is that they dont investigate specific key points (well they didnt in my case). I was told by i believe 'BankFodder' that both organisations will not favour the complainee and that court proceedings were the only way to get final clarity on whether a default is unfair / incorrect or not.