Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

You would have to claim under section 13(1) of the DPA 1998 and this stipulates that an award will only be made when the claimant can show that they have suffered losses by the action of the data controller.
There has never been any award granted for damage to credit rating in this country. The main authorities for this are Smeaton vs equifax and Haliday.
The problem is that the remedies for this are covered by the statue and this is clear.

I have seen cases where companies have made payouts when the injured parties have complained to the FCA OFT ICO and threatened to press for regulatory action if there was no redress paid, this is a different thing to issuing a LBA. When these actually go to court they inevitably fail however for the above reasons.

Hi andy,

Thanks for your reply and advice. As I mentioned in my earlier post, I sent a letter earlier on in the week and hopefully they will respond soon.
I appreciate all the opinions and input coming through which is very helpful as it help in deciding which way to go. I will post back as soon as there is an up date. In the mean time, will be reading the cases quoted.

Thanks
TB

[Rico]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Firstly as said the scottish courts judgment creates no precedent in this country, the supreme court did not issue a judgment on general losses.
There have been many case of this nature since Durkin, and not one has successfully used this case

Sorry to hear this. Not quite what I had fought for.

Could it be that ALL the cases since have waffled on about the DPA? I managed without referring to it. Keep it simple and honest. Common sense.

It seems the DPA is doing a good job at allowing the judiciary to protect it's banker chums, who no doubt have "sponsored" it's creation!

I hope the CRA has the courtesy to compensate the OP soonest.

Rico

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Sorry to hear this. Not quite what I had fought for.

Could it be that ALL the cases since have waffled on about the DPA? I managed without referring to it. Keep it simple and honest. Common sense.

It seems the DPA is doing a good job at allowing the judiciary to protect it's banker chums, who no doubt have "sponsored" it's creation!

I hope the CRA has the courtesy to compensate the OP soonest.

Rico

Hi Rico,

Thanks you for dropping inn. It is also my prayers that things get sorted out sooner.

Thanks

TB

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Hi everyone,

Finally, I got a reply from the CRA. We as you will notice, they are saying that there were two other CCJs against me and that has to be taken into consideration. The have made an offer of £100 for compensation "in line with the Ombudsman guideline" Where does this leave me?

Well as far as the two CCJs are concerned, they were both secured in 2009. One Set Aside in 2010 and the other satisfied in early 2013. The Set Aside one never got communicated by the Court until 2014 when I contacted the court after checking my credit report.

The case in question was entered against me in 2010, set aside there after and communicated to the CRAs but Experian never adjusted their record to reflect the order.

The question is, where does this leave me? Any suggestions?

Thanks Dot.

Thank you for your email, which we received on --/12/2014.

Whilst I appreciate that you would like us to consider a claim for £0000 without evidence of loss or damage caused, I?d like to be clear that this is not something we will be able to do.

With regards to the case of Mr Durkin, the Supreme Court makes no comment about the role of credit reference agencies in its judgment. Moreover, the circumstances of the case differ from your own.

At this stage, I?d like to draw your attention to the requirements as detailed under Section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998. This Section directly relates to claiming compensation for a breach of this legislation.

Under this Section, an individual is required to provide evidence to demonstrate a direct link between the financial loss they have suffered and a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Please note that an individual is only entitled to compensation if they suffer damage as a result of a breach of the Data Protection Act. A claim for distress can only be made in conjunction with a claim for damage, so therefore if no damages have been incurred a company is not liable to pay compensation for distress.

I do understand you wish to be compensated for this, however we would need to point out that at the time this judgment remained on your Credit report, other information would have also affected your ability to obtain finance while the judgment remained, such as the judgment under reference XXXXXX and YYYYYY. We would therefore need to consider this when assessing your claim against us
.
We do understand that we have made this error and I am, with the information available to me now, able to consider a compensation payment in line with the Financial Ombudsman Guideline?s. If you would like to see this yourself, please follow the link below:

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...onvenience.htm

With this in mind I am happy to consider a compensation payment of £100 and this would be our final offer in this regard without any further evidence from yourself. Let me know if you are in agreement to this and I will arrange to send out the necessary acceptance form.

If you are unhappy with this your next step would be to contact the Financial Ombudsman Service as outlined in Joe?s final response email of 29 October 2014.

Kind regards

Miss Emma A Watts
Customer Relations Consultant

Experian

[Guest]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Hi everyone,

Finally, I got a reply from the CRA. We as you will notice, they are saying that there were two other CCJs against me and that has to be taken into consideration. The have made an offer of £100 for compensation "in line with the Ombudsman guideline" Where does this leave me?

Well as far as the two CCJs are concerned, they were both secured in 2009. One Set Aside in 2010 and the other satisfied in early 2013. The Set Aside one never got communicated by the Court until 2014 when I contacted the court after checking my credit report.

The case in question was entered against me in 2010, set aside there after and communicated to the CRAs but Experian never adjusted their record to reflect the order.

The question is, where does this leave me? Any suggestions?

Thanks Dot.

Thank you for your email, which we received on --/12/2014.

Whilst I appreciate that you would like us to consider a claim for £0000 without evidence of loss or damage caused, I?d like to be clear that this is not something we will be able to do.

With regards to the case of Mr Durkin, the Supreme Court makes no comment about the role of credit reference agencies in its judgment. Moreover, the circumstances of the case differ from your own.

At this stage, I?d like to draw your attention to the requirements as detailed under Section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998. This Section directly relates to claiming compensation for a breach of this legislation.

Under this Section, an individual is required to provide evidence to demonstrate a direct link between the financial loss they have suffered and a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Please note that an individual is only entitled to compensation if they suffer damage as a result of a breach of the Data Protection Act. A claim for distress can only be made in conjunction with a claim for damage, so therefore if no damages have been incurred a company is not liable to pay compensation for distress.

I do understand you wish to be compensated for this, however we would need to point out that at the time this judgment remained on your Credit report, other information would have also affected your ability to obtain finance while the judgment remained, such as the judgment under reference XXXXXX and YYYYYY. We would therefore need to consider this when assessing your claim against us
.
We do understand that we have made this error and I am, with the information available to me now, able to consider a compensation payment in line with the Financial Ombudsman Guideline?s. If you would like to see this yourself, please follow the link below:

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...onvenience.htm

With this in mind I am happy to consider a compensation payment of £100 and this would be our final offer in this regard without any further evidence from yourself. Let me know if you are in agreement to this and I will arrange to send out the necessary acceptance form.

If you are unhappy with this your next step would be to contact the Financial Ombudsman Service as outlined in Joe?s final response email of 29 October 2014.

Kind regards

Miss Emma A Watts
Customer Relations Consultant

Experian

Yes as stated , no such thing as general damages(in these circumstances), if you feel that there was a period where the individual entry effected you in a way which you can demonstrate detriment then I would contact them with the details and seek an amended offer on those circumstances if not I would accept the offer.

[jon1965]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

If I am correct CRA's can not be held to account for recording incorrect info if that is the info they were supplied. As Andy says unless you can prove a "cost" to you hurt feelings will not get you anywhere I am afraid. £100 is money so I would be inclined to take it unless you can show good reason.

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Yes as stated , no such thing as general damages(in these circumstances), if you feel that there was a period where the individual entry effected you in a way which you can demonstrate detriment then I would contact them with the details and seek an amended offer on those circumstances if not I would accept the offer.

Hi andy,

Thanks for your response. I might have to check on some of my old records to confirm that.

Thanks

TB

[nemesis45]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

I agree.
You could your grievance to FOS, but would not uphold a great hope of getting more than the offer made.

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

I agree.
You could your grievance to FOS, but would not uphold a great hope of getting more than the offer made.

Hi nemesis,

Thanks for your reply.

TB

[nemesis45]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Happy to help!

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

If I am correct CRA's can not be held to account for recording incorrect info if that is the info they were supplied. As Andy says unless you can prove a "cost" to you hurt feelings will not get you anywhere I am afraid. £100 is money so I would be inclined to take it unless you can show good reason.

Thanks jon,

That is what I learnt now. However, I think it is wrong. In my case it was not that they were provided with wrong information but they decided not to remove the CCJ from my file for 4 years after the judgement was set Aside despite the communication from the court. Surely, they must be held responsible.

That said, I know that will not happened but I think it needs to bee challenge as they are getting away with murder and think they are above the law. It is very difficult for one to prove what they are requesting of course.

Thanks
TB

[jon1965]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

I do agree that it is wrong they can hold incorrect data on you, I also wonder how you will ever know what the loss is to yourself. What it needs is someone to take them on however the costs involved and our legal system means you could potentially need very deep pockets as it is quite possible to win but lose out financially. I do not believe that the Durkin case can be used here as the circumstances were substantially different . It is I think time to take a pragmatic approach , take the money and say thank you very much.

[nemesis45]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

There is a view that the continuing reporting of the conduct of an account should record each event and the events remain on file for 6 years. So:

Account Opened and Record Starts
Transactions recorded.
Payments recorded.
Missed/ Late payments recorded.
Default Recorded.
Debt sold new owner updates files.
Owner issues claim.
Judgment made and is recorded as public information and remains on file for 6 years.
Set aside applied files marked judgement set aside.

The argument is for/against recording the true conduct of the account.

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

There is a view that the continuing reporting of the conduct of an account should record each event and the events remain on file for 6 years. So:

Account Opened and Record Starts
Transactions recorded.
Payments recorded.
Missed/ Late payments recorded.
Default Recorded.
Debt sold new owner updates files.
Owner issues claim.
Judgment made and is recorded as public information and remains on file for 6 years.
Set aside applied files marked judgement set aside.

The argument is for/against recording the true conduct of the account.

Hi nemesis,

I get the points you stated above but where do we place a case like mine where nothing was done. The reporting continued for 4 years as if there was no order to set aside the CCJ. One interesting point is that this debt (paid or not) would have been more than 6 years. Therefore, reporting after the Set aside prolonged it. The Original CCJ was obtained just before it was statute barred. It my assumption that setting it aside would reset the clock to pre-litigation stage. I could be wrong but in my opinion, this amount to processing incorrect data.
From what you stated above, they should have adjusted it to set aside or to reflect that. On this when I spoke to the CRA, they said when a judgement is set aside, they do remove them completely from ones file. That is what they did eventually.

I hope I am making sense but in my opinion, which ever way I look at it there has been incorrect reporting which unfortunately, the CRA can not be held responsible for.

Is this really fair?

Thanks TB

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

I do agree that it is wrong they can hold incorrect data on you, I also wonder how you will ever know what the loss is to yourself. What it needs is someone to take them on however the costs involved and our legal system means you could potentially need very deep pockets as it is quite possible to win but lose out financially. I do not believe that the Durkin case can be used here as the circumstances were substantially different . It is I think time to take a pragmatic approach , take the money and say thank you very much.

Hi Jon,

Sorry I missed your post. I agree with everything you said and believe its the best way forward on this occasion
Thanks
TB.