Attempt at getting defaults removed

[ellielou]

I sent 5 letter soff a few weeks ago along with the S10 Notice - I've had 3 refusals - any advice would be much appreciated...........

 

M&S

The Limitations Act 1980. Allow you the comsumer to bring any action against us for up to 6 years after the contract has ended. As a result we are permitted to hold and process your data for up to 6 years after the contract has ended so that we can contest any action brought against us in court.

 

Next

Have included ICO Data Sharing info - I think this is the one

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/credit_%20agreements%20-%20data_%20sharing.pdf

 

First Direct quote -

Financial Services Act 1986

Money Laundering Regulations

Tax Management Act 1970

& thier T&C's - to prevent crime, to verify your identity and to recover debt, we may exchange information with other members of HSBC, and, where appropiate, with fraud prevention and debt recovery agencies and other organisations including lenders.

FD retian data until we are confident that it can be deleted from our records. FD would only delete data if it was confident that it was no longer required or if directed to remove by the Dta Protection Commissioner.

 

Sorry to be so long winded - but has anyone else had anything similar & where should I go from here.

 

Ellieloux

[crh]

M&S

The Limitations Act 1980. Allow you the comsumer to bring any action against us for up to 6 years after the contract has ended. As a result we are permitted to hold and process your data for up to 6 years after the contract has ended so that we can contest any action brought against us in court.

 

I'm not familiar with that act. it was my understanding that they couldnt process your data after the contract has ended and you withdraw your permisson

q1 have you settled the defaulted account?

someone more advanced might be able to give you more advice on this one. i'd also check with the infomation commisonaires office

same again with the first direct one really. I'd give the ICO a call and find out where you stand. I'd also check to see if they have removed the default. These organisations like to think they have power above everyone and hate it when people point out there wrong. So they might of removed the default but sent you out a letter telling you to go away

dayglo and surlybonds are good people to ask for advice on this and also the ICO

 

[crh]

hey ellielou

 

i gave the Information Commissioners Office office a call RE m+s quoting the limitations act about not removing the default. They weren't too familiar with the limitations act but suggested contacting the OFT to check if this would apply to keeping a default on record

 

ok i just rang the OFT (its a slow day at work today) and the guy there seemed to think that the limitations act wouldnt apply for them to refuse to remove a default notice as the limitations act is designed for you or m+s to to take court action against you for breach of contract. Its not designed for credit scoring information. he was passing it onto somewhere more senior for a definte opinion

 

anyway looks like ms might be in the wrong!

[ellielou]

crh you are a star :)

Thanks for chasing this up for me - I'm dead busy at the minute so these may have to take the back seat for a little while. Although might see if I can find anythink on net about Limitations act - I'll post here if I find anything.

Once again many thanks xx

[TheAnalyst]

any news?

[ellielou]

No news at all - to be honest I haven't really followed any of these up, mainly because I was stuck on where to go next.

[crh]

any luck ellielou?

[ellielou]

None, they all refused to move the defaults.

I've tried another tack now (see letter below) but had no reply to any of these yet - looks like I'll just have to live with them

 

Thank you for your letter dated 22nd June 2007.

My credit report shows the default was registered on 06/08/2003. The credit report also goes on to explain that status code 8 means; ‘The account is in default. You have failed to keep to your credit agreement and have not responded satisfactorily to requests to bring your payments up to date, so the credit agreement has ended.’

I was having difficulties with payments due to my ex partner being made redundant and Next requested that I made an arrangement to pay for the goods I obtained . You will note from your records that in early March 2003 I wrote to Next explaining the difficulties and reasons for these. I also informed you that I had developed a payment plan with the Consumer Credit Counselling Service and offered Next a monthly payment of £5.00. These payments were accepted monthly by Next until a partial settlement amount was offered in April 2005. The fact that Next accepted these payments monthly until the account was partially settled indicates this was satisfactory. Therefore the default on my credit report is incorrect. A default should not be used as I had responded satisfactorily to requests to bring payments up to date.

My finances are now in order and this entry on my credit file, as I am sure you will be aware, is having a significant detrimental effect on my credit worthiness. I have confirmed the above facts with The Information Commissioners Office and should the this entry not be corrected within the next 14 days I will seek a court order to force you to correct the entry.

I look forward to your response within 14 days.

[ellielou]

Not a dicky bird from anyone regarding my last letter

 

However, I note that Cahoot have not corrected an item on my credit report & it's been that way since June 2005, despite them sending me a letter confriming the correction!!!!

 

I've had a letter from them asking me to forward a copy of my credit report, which I did (over a month ago) with a letter giving them 14 days to correct the info, I also had another go in the same letter to get rid of the default (it was worth a go).

 

Now they haven't replied or removed the items - so I guess my question is where do I go from here? Do I file a complaint to the Information Commisioners Office or do I get a court order (or are they the same thing???).

 

As you can see I'm a bit clueless as to where to go next with this one so any help would be appreciated x

[granthar]

"A default should not be used as I had responded satisfactorily to requests to bring payments up to date."

 

This is an interesting point, if they issued a default and subsequently agreed to accept lower payments wouldn't they be breaching the banking code? namely para 13.6 point 3?

Para 13.6 of the banking code states very clearly the conditions which must exist before personal data will be passed to the Credit Reference Agencies under the contractual permission to share data with third parties:-

 

You must be behind with your payments

1. The debt must not be in dispute
   
2. The bank must have given you a formal demand with reasonable time to respond
   
3. Your response must be unacceptable to the bank
   

Has anyone tried this approach?

[TheAnalyst]

Did you get anything back at all?

[BankFodder]

Once you have given permission under the contract, the permission wil endure beyond the contract in respect only of data obtained during the contract for as long as it is useful to process it. M&S reliance on the LA seems reasonable enough to me and I don't think that you can challenge the reasoning.

 

I doubt whetherM&S are subcribers to the banking code - but check that one out. If they are and you have satisfactorily responded as you say you have then you have a basis for complaint.

 

On the other hand, the CRA's are under guidance from he IC not to enter defaults in respect of sums in dispute- very much like para.13, Banking Code.

If you can show that this was the case then you may have a complaint against them.

 

By and large, there is no magic recipe for removing defaults. You have to be in the right, you have to have all of your evidence, you must have all of your i's dotted and t's crossed and you have to have the energy for a very persistent fight as they would rather cut their own hands off than remove defaults.

[jysmystry]

you have to have the energy for a very persistent fight as they would rather cut their own hands off than remove defaults.

 

I'll admit that based on my experiences I'd have to agree with this.

 

I'd liketo think that banks would listen to people who had valid and genuine complaints but they dont, qite simple they couldn't give a stuff.

 

If i was going down this road again knowing what i know know i wouldn't waste my time trying to place nice with then. Get your info together, get your facts straight and get the ball rolling.

 

Write and ask then to remove it nicely, they'll say no so LBA then court. Its sadly the only way they listen. Its a terrible state of affairs