CAG CRA S.A.R Club

[PriorityOne]

I made an interesting discovery after requesting my credit file from Experian last year. They had allowed an ex-mortgage company to do an unauthorised search, despite the fact that a F&F settlement was agreed and accepted by this company about 9 years ago and they had no reason to nosey around my credit file at all.

 

Never had any further contact from the mortgage company either. Strange....

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello PriorityOne!

 

I made an interesting discovery after requesting my credit file from Experian last year. They had allowed an ex-mortgage company to do an unauthorised search, despite the fact that a F&F settlement was agreed and accepted by this company about 9 years ago and they had no reason to nosey around my credit file at all.

 

That reminds me, when we get our S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) back, I bet it does not show how the CRAs send out Attention Messages to their friends?

 

i.e. you make the "mistake" of asking to see your Debt Data, they harvest new Address details, and a week later an old DCA or other low life pops up to make Contact.

 

How, exactly, did the Message get to them? This should be shown in our SAR request...but I bet it isn't.

 

Never had any further contact from the mortgage company either. Strange....

 

But, as you say, what were they doing in there in the first place having a sniff around? Just another example of the Open Access the CRAs give to almost anyone in the Debt Industry, and yet they make our own access very hard indeed, needing layer upon layer of "Security Checks" before we can see just the tip of our true Debt Data iceberg.

 

Cheers,

BRW

[PriorityOne]

 

But, as you say, what were they doing in there in the first place having a sniff around? Just another example of the Open Access the CRAs give to almost anyone in the Debt Industry, and yet they make our own access very hard indeed, needing layer upon layer of "Security Checks" before we can see just the tip of our true Debt Data iceberg.

 

Cheers,

BRW

 

It certainly rams home the point of always keeping a tight hold of all your paperwork though.... 'coz if not, what proof would there be that a F&F was reached all those years ago ?.... and why are they hanging on to it anyway ? Maybe it's the prelude to a sell-off of an alleged outstanding balance.

 

If so, they will be in DEEP doo-doo.

 

Trust no-one in the financial/government industries. DVLA passed on my details around that time as well.

[Allwood]

A conversation that I had with Equifax concerning two DCA footprints on my my credit file. I was told that these people had signed to Equifax therefore they can go into file on the bases that they have all the necessary paper work to do so. DCA do not have to let the CRA see the paper it is all done on DCA's honesty when they say they have the necessary paperwork....hahaha.

 

On the bases of that call it was clear that any DCA that the CRA have signed up on their books and I expect the DCA's pay lip services to the CAR for that services to sniff around in anyone credit history.

Edited June 15, 2008 by Allwood
dublication

[Allwood]

Edited June 15, 2008 by Allwood

[renegotiation]

But if we are to Petition to have two CRAs closed down, my vote goes to Experian, they need to be shut down first!

 

I vote for Experian too. However, they seem to have the most info. It would probably only be practical to have the other 2 shut down first. Callcredit to begin with and then Equifax. Experian should then be shut down and a government agency take over all the data. I say shut down, but personal credit files are just 1 aspect of their businesses of course. Shame that...

[BlueSquirrel]

So... if you have given permission for a company to check your CRA record when you take out a credit card with them, does that mean they can go back and have another look whenever they feel like it? I had a credit card company reduce my credit limit recently as they had done a "review of my current financial situation." Where did they get this information from? I was not in arrears on this card, nor had I had any problems with them in about 10 years.

[Allwood]

It appears that when DCA signs up with a CRA they have access at their fingertips with no questions asked. Also DCA's goes into people credit files on fishing expedition to sniff around to see who they can harass to get threatening them into paying money to them.

[citizenB]

I vote for Experian too. However, they seem to have the most info. It would probably only be practical to have the other 2 shut down first. Callcredit to begin with and then Equifax. Experian should then be shut down and a government agency take over all the data. I say shut down, but personal credit files are just 1 aspect of their businesses of course. Shame that...

 

Is that wise in the light of the recent lapse of security ?

[JonCris]

I made an interesting discovery after requesting my credit file from Experian last year. They had allowed an ex-mortgage company to do an unauthorised search, despite the fact that a F&F settlement was agreed and accepted by this company about 9 years ago and they had no reason to nosey around my credit file at all.

 

Never had any further contact from the mortgage company either. Strange....

 

I don't want to cause you concern PO you but FF or not the mortgage company CAN return for a 2nd bite if there was no consideration given by you at the time of FF

 

Although it may precipitate things (better now than later when your not expecting it) I suggest you need to contact them & ask why they searched your file without your lawful consent. Dependent on what they reply you should then request confirmation that the debt & any guarantees attached thereto have been fully discharged at the time of the FF

[renegotiation]

Is that wise in the light of the recent lapse of security ?

 

In my eyes, the best option of a bad bunch unfortunately. I accept the need for a C.R.A.. Can anyone think of an alternative to a government agency? Surely that is better than the Holy Trinity we currently suffer?!

[car2403]

In my eyes, the best option of a bad bunch unfortunately. I accept the need for a C.R.A.. Can anyone think of an alternative to a government agency? Surely that is better than the Holy Trinity we currently suffer?!

 

I would trust the government less than I do these 3, anyway

[ScarletPimpernel]

The difficulty with letting a government agency take on something like this is that whilst they are perfectly capable of making an utter balls-up of it themselves, they are likely to sub-contract the job to Crapita or a similar company, who will make an even worse mess, whilst costing more.

 

In my view what's needed is effective enforcement of current data protection legislation, and perhaps some sort of industry-specific enforcement agency to keep the credit reference agencies in line - OFTWAT, perhaps?

 

There is no doubt that the industry would benefit from being considerably more transparent than it currently is. The way they sell credit reports - appearing to be purely for the benefit of the consumer, whilst the reality is that individuals are being charged for the privilege of giving more data to these creatures to be sold - is misleading and dishonest. Perhaps the latest Unfair Commercial Practices legislation will be of some use.

[ScarletPimpernel]

The difficulty with letting a government agency take on something like this is that whilst they are perfectly capable of making an utter balls-up of it themselves, they are likely to sub-contract the job to Crapita or a similar company, who will make an even worse mess, whilst costing more.

 

In my view what's needed is effective enforcement of current data protection legislation, and perhaps some sort of industry-specific enforcement agency to keep the credit reference agencies in line - OFTWAT, perhaps?

 

There is no doubt that the industry would benefit from being considerably more transparent than it currently is. The way they sell credit reports - appearing to be purely for the benefit of the consumer, whilst the reality is that individuals are being charged for the privilege of giving more data to these creatures to be sold - is misleading and dishonest. Perhaps the latest Unfair Commercial Practices legislation will be of some use.

[renegotiation]

Lol. We should run a poll on it. The government can access the C.R.A.'s as it is can't they?

[JonCris]

Why are some assuming we need CRA's. Although they would like you to think so they are of no benefit to the consumer whatsoever

 

It's not that long ago that businesses (& banks) managed just fine without them

[PriorityOne]

I don't want to cause you concern PO you but FF or not the mortgage company CAN return for a 2nd bite if there was no consideration given by you at the time of FF

 

Although it may precipitate things (better now than later when your not expecting it) I suggest you need to contact them & ask why they searched your file without your lawful consent. Dependent on what they reply you should then request confirmation that the debt & any guarantees attached thereto have been fully discharged at the time of the FF

 

Hiya JonCris.... and thanks for your post.

 

The F&F was agreed between the OC and myself in writing years ago, along with their confirmation that my credit file would be updated to reflect the settlement. I still have all documentation, so am not worried.... just curious as to why they chose to snoop around some 9 years later, unless they were hoping to find some kind of link with my ex-partner in order to go and chase him for some.

 

[JonCris]

It doesn't matter.

 

If the FF was was well below the amount outstanding they CAN come back for as second bite if there was no consideration.

 

I again suggest you need to know why they have unlawfully searched your file if only to report the bums to the Information Commissioners Office

[car2403]

OFTWAT, perhaps?

 

:D

 

Brilliant!

 

I could come up with more, but I'd be CAG-botted, so won't bother...

 

[PriorityOne]

It doesn't matter.

 

If the FF was was well below the amount outstanding they CAN come back for as second bite if there was no consideration.

 

 

What do you mean by "no consideration" ?

[PriorityOne]

Ok, no worries. Got it.

 

I've not worried for the past 10 years, so won't be contacting them, but I do appreciate your views JC.

 

IMO, my consideration was the alteration of the payment terms; the payment of a larger amount in a F&F (more than my monthly token payments over several years) sooner and the benefit to them that they had a lump sum (albeit small) quicker.... even though it was less than the full amount. Hope you can follow that.... lol.

 

So.... I have suffered a detriment by giving a larger amount sooner and they have had a benefit by receiving more money immediately, than they otherwise would have.

 

Sorted... .... in my mind anyway.... lol.

[renegotiation]

Why are some assuming we need CRA's. Although they would like you to think so they are of no benefit to the consumer whatsoever

 

It's not that long ago that businesses (& banks) managed just fine without them

 

I would agree that they hold too much information. I think creditors should just see how many cards, loans and mortgages you have and your combined debt in each category. I don't think they should be able to see individual debts. I would still hold that there needs to be some sort of well regulated or government C.R.A. in existence. Nice to have a debate though. Just for the record, no one thinks we actually need more than 1 agency, if any, do they?

[2Grumpy]

They are commercial money making ventures so there will be as many as the market will bear.

 

If they were government depts they would have been privatised by now with ways of putting them in fake competition with each other invented ...

[JonCris]

Ok, no worries. Got it.

 

I've not worried for the past 10 years, so won't be contacting them, but I do appreciate your views JC.

 

IMO, my consideration was the alteration of the payment terms; the payment of a larger amount in a F&F (more than my monthly token payments over several years) sooner and the benefit to them that they had a lump sum (albeit small) quicker.... even though it was less than the full amount. Hope you can follow that.... lol.

 

So.... I have suffered a detriment by giving a larger amount sooner and they have had a benefit by receiving more money immediately, than they otherwise would have.

 

Sorted... .... in my mind anyway.... lol.

 

Correct PO that you would argue was your consideration

 

& here's more info about the strange world of 'consideration' for those following this thread

 

In the world of contract law when an agreement is made a certain amount of consideration is put into the agreement from both parties.

 

Party A (the offeror) and Party B (the offeree)

 

 

A offers to sell his wife:eek: for £10k to B.

 

B agrees and stumps up the cash.

 

Here is the tricky bit so bear with me all,

 

 

The consideration by A is the following: handing over the wife:shock: for an amount of cash predetermined at the sale.

 

Consideration by B is at the following point: When B hands over the cash to A; A then hands over the wife & that completes the transaction & the agreement/contract is completed.

 

Consider the following in terms of repaying a debt in full and final offer,

 

By offering a creditor payment to be considered as full and final - what consideration are you as the offeror are you putting into the agreement?

 

Nothing - you are gaining something while the offeree will gain nothing.

 

Under common law this agreement can be retracted by the creditor and he can reclaim the full balance remaining.

However by offering EARLY repayment in full and final, then you are providing some sort of consideration to the deal, even though you are paying less, the fact that you are paying early means that the creditor is getting something out of the deal - his money early - albiet not the full amount but that he receives it early can be argued by you is the consideration – the early settlement, if correct, & needs to be made clear at the outset.

 

Please Note* this does not apply when a creditor makes YOU the offe as that is completely of their own making & choice, the giving a a consideration should only be applied when making you make an offer to a creditor out of the blue.

 

As I have already stated EARLY is a good word to add when making an offer of repayment in full and final satisfaction.

The problem here is how to deal with the enforcement of gratuitous promises.

A gratuitous promise means a promise for which the promisee does nothing in return.

Every legal system recognises that to enforce all gratuitous promises would be undesirable, since there is too great a risk that the promisor may have given his word lightly on the spur of the moment and without proper reflection, for example to extricate himself from an awkward or embarrassing situation. A gratuitous promise will therefore only be enforced if it was made in a way which shows that the promisor must have known what he was doing and intended to be legally bound.

 

[JonCris]

I would agree that they hold too much information. I think creditors should just see how many cards, loans and mortgages you have and your combined debt in each category. I don't think they should be able to see individual debts. I would still hold that there needs to be some sort of well regulated or government C.R.A. in existence. Nice to have a debate though. Just for the record, no one thinks we actually need more than 1 agency, if any, do they?

 

What business is it of you, me or anyone else, including CRA's to know about my financial affairs. We are all adults & quite capable of making our own decisions as are the lenders in their dealing with me

 

Yes many have found it difficult going but not because of bad management or fecklessness but in many cases because of changed circumstances such as redundancy, divorce, illness etc none of which the best data base in the world would foresee

 

Also the way they calculate your ability to repay debt based on your credit file is a complete nonsense & why I'll come back to later to try & explain