Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

[Guest]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

We'll have to wait and see Andy...you are again at complete odds with Senior Judge Halbert and with Pt and Counsel on this .....I've said it before "you are on the outside looking in"...and again according to your views it appears that I will be setting another precedent.
At this moment B/H are not very keen to go back to Court .....make your own reasons up as to why.

Kophraror did not prove any loss as far as I know

Sparkie

NO onc again Sparkie I understand the law.
K was about a dishonoured cheque, the bank had promised payment then declined this caused actual losses to the person concerned, this is a world away form a displaced credit marker.

YOu fail to understand the difference hopefully those advising you do however. If you have suffered losses due to the misplaced marker, even if they cannot be directly quantified you may get an award, but this is different, I get the feeling I am banging my head against a brick wall with you yet again .

My concern and the reason I comment is not because of your case, but because of others who may have similar claims and who may be mislead by your misunderstanding of your position.

[nemesis45]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Here,Here!!

[Rico]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

If you have suffered losses due to the misplaced marker, even if they cannot be directly quantified you may get an award, but this is different,

How's it different?

Kpohraror was awarded general damages of around £5K in 1996. I was awarded the equivalent in 2008. Specific damages in both cases were denied. King (v British Linen) was awarded the equivalet in the early 20th century. I don't think King, like Sparkie, claimed specific damages.

I would still have been awarded £8K for general damages, even if I hadn't sufffered specific loss (which Scottish appeal judges decided that I hadn't suffered anyway, after deleting the truth!)

Kpohraror & King, I understand are both English cases that my Scottish case (ratified in London) was based on.

None of the cases referred to the DPA.

The OP has suffered loss by the mere misplacing (actually - failure to remove) of the marker.

[Guest]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Because as stated in smeaton.

The losses must be "real".

In the cases you mention the damage was real and tangible, although it would have been difficult to place an exact value on them.
In the case of a misplaced marker where no damage is done , becasue, perhaps other defauts exist, or maybee there had been no applications for credit so it was no noticed, there was no damge, so no award can be given,

[Guest]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Here is a relevant section of he halidy case and as you see it distiguishes Kpohraro

Section 23 when mentioning Kpohraro, states that although no damages were calculated, damages must be shown. It distinguished the situation where a check is returned, and the possible effect on trade of a reputation for bouncing checks, to the situation where a credit marker once removed would give no indication to future lenders of any earlier problem, and therefor the earlier error would have little or no ongoing effect on the subjects creditably.

[Rico]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

The OP's losses are real.

Damage has been done for 4 years. Kpohraror & King were screwed just for a short while.

Just because other defaults exist, shouldn't give a CRA authority to publish whatever it chooses!

That's like saying it's OK for other bullies in the playground to wade right on in. Clearly, not.

The judge in Smeaton may not have understood this principle. Perhaps the law allows a blind eye to be turned in favour of the bullies. Either way (or both!), it's a shame.

I hope we can help the OP compile a simple small claim, without referring to the DPA.

(Assumes TB is willing to give it a go)

[Rico]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

the earlier error would have little or no ongoing effect on the subjects creditably.

Agreed. No ongoing effect. (Although in my case, because the crime has yet to be rectified, it's had a MASSIVE ongoing effect!)

General damages were awarded for what happened in the past, even if it was for a very short time. Kpohraror's reputation was annihilated only until the bank rectified it's mistake. It was annihilated nonetheless - general damages.

Kpohraror should have been awarded specific damages but that would have required a judge with a little more gumption..

[Thandabird]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

The OP's losses are real.

Damage has been done for 4 years. Kpohraror & King were screwed just for a short while.

Just because other defaults exist, shouldn't give a CRA authority to publish whatever it chooses!

That's like saying it's OK for other bullies in the playground to wade right on in. Clearly, not.

The judge in Smeaton may not have understood this principle. Perhaps the law allows a blind eye to be turned in favour of the bullies. Either way (or both!), it's a shame.

I hope we can help the OP compile a simple small claim, without referring to the DPA.

(Assumes DOT is willing to give it a go)

Hi Rico,

Thanks for that suggestion. I am willing to give it a go and hopefully it will help to clear out a lot of issues which has been dis cussed.

I can see that there are different views but what I would request from the team is to help me move forward and let the judge decide as the outcome may help others in the future, irrespective end result.

It is clear that this is not the first case and certainly it will not be the last one. Therefore unless challenged we will never know where we stand as consumers.

TB

[Guest]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

There we come into remoteness, unfortunately.

The facts is that whether people understand the mechanics or not, there has never been an award for damages just on on a misplaced marker, the statute says that no such damages can be awarded, all relevant case law support that they cannot.
There are at least a dozen cases on here and over the way where your case has been mentioned and disregarded when trying to get awards for general losses, I really do not know how much more there is to say.

[Guest]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Hi Rico,

Thanks for that suggestion. I am willing to give it a go and hopefully it will help to clear out a lot of issues which has been dis cussed.

I can see that there are different views but what I would request from the team is to help me move forward and let the judge decide as the outcome may help others in the future, irrespective end result.

It is clear that this is not the first case and certainly it will not be the last one. Therefore unless challenged we will never know where we stand as consumers.

TB

I would be very disappointed indeed if the team helped you with any such suicidal endeavour. Judges have already decided this issue, many times.

[Guest]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Salutary tale here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ighlight=noddy

Post 513 says it all really

[ncf355]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

NO onc again Sparkie I understand the law.
K was about a dishonoured cheque, the bank had promised payment then declined this caused actual losses to the person concerned, this is a world away form a displaced credit marker.

Having read the case, it appears as though he alleged damage to reputation, but I cannot see anywhere in the judgment where K detailed how the losses were incurred and justified the amounts Andy

If it is the case that he didn't quantify the loss, then his was also a claim for non pecuniary damages as with the Durkin case

Can you point us to where he detailed the loss if that is the case?

[ncf355]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

pohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 AER 119
The claimant was a self-employed importer and exporter of goods. He held a current account with the defendant Building Society. The claimant purchased some goods for £4,550 from a wholesale supplier who agreed to supply hm with the goods and ship them to Nigeria for resale. He paid for the goods by cheque, however the cheque was wrongly dishonoured. The Defendants corrected their mistake a day later. The claimant brought an action for breach of contract and claimed general damages for loss of business reputation. The damages included a small allowance for loss of reputation in Nigeria. The defendants admitted the breach but disputed the claim for loss of reputation. The Master awarded £5,550. The defendant appealed contending the claimant should only have been awarded nominal damages.

Held:

The Master was entitled to award general damages. The Court of Appeal lifted the rule of no recovery for general damages for damage to financial reputation which had previously only been available in relation to tradesman.

Evans LJ in relation to the rule in Hadley v Baxendale:

[ncf355]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

So the above states a non tradesman (e.g: Joe Public) is entitled to damages for loss of financial reputation

If an inaccurate Default isn't loss of reputation, what is?

[Guest]

Re: Incorrect Data Entry by CRA

Yes indeed, but as said the losses are real, although not quantifiable, in the case of a misplaced marker where there are no avenues for loss there can be no claim, this is explained more fully in smeaton and in haliday, but this is basically the case. The loaa of business reputation was also identified.
If a credit marker is wrongly placed, the person only finds out about it when he applies for credit, it has no damaging effect other than at that time. then the CRA removes the marker when notified the person can re apply and the marker would not have any effect anyway.

It is an entirely different scenario, but you do not have to take my word for it look at the cases mentioned and any other lower court cases which have tried to use K as president.