equifax refuse to remove 2008 searches for old debts

sa1

Hi All

Have had a search placed on my file in table one which lenders can see, this search was Nov 1 2008 for an old debt some 7 years + ago, i have not made a payment on the alleged debt or acknowledged it ever for 7 years +.

so sent this letter to equifax and j2 solutions and received the letter below from equifax, any help in next step would be appreciated, i will be issuing an online claim in two days against equifax , has anybody won in cort recently against a cra or debt co?

Thanks for help

Re- J2 Solutions Credit Searches and other searches

I write to request the removal of an illegal entry by J2 Solutions on my equifax file.

I write further with regard to all the previous issues you have been aware of and that I now submit this Notice under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act 1998 to erase/delete all the unsubstantiated data & information supplied by you and all other on my file about me because this false libellous/defamatory entry being maintained on your files by you is causing me both severe unwarranted distress and damage.

I further support this notice and exercise my right given to me under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which is embedded in the UK Human Rights Act ( the right to privacy to home life and personal correspondence). With regard to personal data which states “all individuals have the right to have incorrect data about them corrected”.

The information supplied by you and the other debt collectors is unsupported by documentation of any description.
Under the Fourth Principle data controllers ( you are a data controller under the Data Protection Act 1998 must now take “ more than reasonable steps to ensure that the processing of data is lawful, correct, accurate and true”.

Merely placing a marker (dispute notice) on an individuals credit file will not be sufficient to protect a data controller from libel action.

The Data Protection Act 1998 also states that the necessary steps to be taken will be different in each individual case, this means that the standard letters sent out by you are no longer worth the paper they are written on, every case and dispute is different as seen by my case.

Should you attempt to use their position of miss conceived power and refuse to remove this information, I will immediately without further warning take out proceedings against you for Defamation in the County Court, bearing in mind no monetary loss has to be proven in Defamation claims.

In such court proceedings I will submit that you be put to strict proof to prove that the defamatory information entered by you and other debt collectors on my credit files is in fact accurate true and correct in every respect, and produce the necessary documentary evidence to substantiate it.

As I will be able to show quite clearly that it is in fact incorrect I have no doubt at all I will be successful in my claim.

I will be taking action against you as one suppliers of this information in a separate claim, to avoid this action I suggest that yo comply with my section 10 notice and offer compensation to the value stated in the case as damage to a persons credit status in 1996 at £5500

Kpohraror v The Woolwich [1996] 4 All ER 119
see [1920] AC 102 at 112, [1918-19] All ER Rep 1035 at 1037 per Lord Birkenhead LC). The credit rating of individuals is as important for their personal transactions, including mortgages and hire-purchase as well as banking facilities, as it is for those who are engaged in trade, and it is notorious that central registers are now kept. I would have no hesitation in holding that what is in effect a presumption of some damage arises in every case, in so far as this is a presumption of fact.

According to the National Statistics office £ £5,500 equates to over £ 8000, I am therefore prepared to accept £ 5,500 although County Courts can award up to £10,000 in a Defamation claim.

I submit under all circumstances that you are in breach of the First, Third ,Fourth & Fifth Priciples and should you not comply with the section 10 notice a further breach of the Sixth Principle

---

Letter from equifax:


Thank you for your recent correspondence, details of which have been passed to me for investigation and resolution.

Re: J2 Solutions - Searches
Please note that the type of search recorded by the above company indicates the presence of an outstanding debt and will remain on your Credit Report for a period of six years. I would advise that should you require any further information regarding this matter or the debt this search is associated with, that you contact the company concerned and they will advise you further.

I have included contact details for this company below for your convenience.

J2 Solutions Ltd
SUITE 503 DAISYFIELD BUSINESS
CENTRE APPLEBY STREET
BLACKBURN
LANCASHIRE
BB1 3BL

---

i also received the following letter about another search from capquest made recently in 2008 for an alleged debt that i do not owe and their date as unpaid debt is over 7 years old on my equifax file,
any advice on how to proceed or just take same court action as above?
thanks

Re: Removal Of Data
I also acknowledge your comments in regards to the revocation of your permission for Equifax to continue to process your data, it is our view, also shared by the Information Commissioner's Office, that we are able to share account data between lenders and the Credit Reference Agencies for the duration of the contract and for 6 years beyond on the basis of paragraph 6 of Sch 2 of the Data Protection Act.

This states "“The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case because of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.”

In your letter you also refer to Section 10 of the Act which, as you state, awards the data subject the right to request that the data controller discontinues the processing and disclosing of his/her data. Section 10 sub-paragraph (1)(a) and (b) states that the processing of such data must be likely to cause the data subject substantial damage or substantial distress, and more importantly that such damage and distress must be unwarranted.

We do not believe that you have established that, or provided specified reasons why, our continued processing of your data has caused you substantial damage or substantial distress and that is or would be unwarranted. We feel that it would be irresponsible of Equifax to remove your credit history information, as this may result in you being unable to obtain credit, or being given credit which you would otherwise not have been able to obtain, which may in turn lead to over-commitment.

For the reasons we have set out above we are not able to remove the requested information from our systems. I hope I have adequately explained our reasons for taking this stance. You may want to refer this matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office. If so, their address is as follows:

Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

bigaitch

Hello Sa1
How did you get on ?

I have the same problem at the moment with equifax and a company called thames credit, I also have a ruling from the I.C.O that the search carried out by thames was in breach of the data protection act, the ICO have ordered its removal but still neither equifax or thames have complied. I am now looking also to sue for defamation and see a solicitor next week, I am sure this type of search is placed on your credit file to keep reporting the debt even though it is statute barred,(NO LEGAL ACTION TO RECOVER IT CAN BE TAKEN) If the debt still exsists (it hasnt been paid off) I am sure this is a way for it to be reported indefinately
good luck

GeorgeUK

Sa1 hasn't been online since 4th January, but this is an interesting point.

You may want to head over to the consumeractiongroup forum and post up a query in their legal section. They are really good on the legailities, but i must admit this is the first time i've come across this.

CiciBaltimore

but what is your question? dont you need any help?

bigaitch

Many thanks for the reply GeorgeUK
I will have a look at the consumer action group forum later, Over the last 15 months I have been fighting against these illegal entries on my credit file the searches are being maliciously and deliberately reported via the table one search with equifax to cause damage to my credit rating, they are also reporting on my wifes credit report ( presumably to show up in any associate search) equifax have offered very little help on this and blame thames credit/aktiv for the entries, thames blame eqauifax but both now are still reporting even though the ICO have ruled they must remove the information
Equifax are supposed to be a responsible data controller but the irresponsible way they have handled this is now beyond a joke, I believe the implications of this to be huge and there are thousands of unaware consumers out there this is happening to :mad:

Hello CiciBaltimore
I think the time has now come for me to seek the help of a professional solicitor that practices in civil litigation and persue them both for defamation

jeccapf

See, now, this is the issue that I am fighting, and I received exactly the same letter from equifax, word for word (which always makes me suspect they know they are wrong.)

To review my understanding:
The Data Protection Act only allows the credit reference agencies to hold information in the public domain, ie: where it has been adjudicated in court such as ccj or bankruptcy, (otherwise they are breaching article 6 of the human rights act a right to defence) or where a contract is ongoing.

When the contract ends, so does the data controllers permission to process your information which permission was given as part of the contract. Or they can report activity where you are looking to set up a contract - so the company does a search. (The company cannot do a search just out of interest.)

The 6 year rule is for the courts to hold information on a defaulted account, nowhere in the DPA does it give permission for the CRA's to hold anything for 6 years, thats just what they have created themselves as "industry standard".

It is admittedly easier to force a company to remove defaults/stop illegal searches, but these credit reference agencies are getting out of control, they claim a legal right that is not theirs to claim.

Another point - check who owns the debt collection agency - some of them are owned by equifax and experian which would open a whole new can of worms legally!

My own feeling on this is that I am 99.9999999999999999% certain that a case against the CRA for breach of data protection, breach of human rights and defamation would succeed, and at this point they've driven me so far down that I have absolutely nothing to lose - I'm gonna run it up the flag pole and see what flies.

Maybe, we're seeing the beginning of a new 'bank charges' case - what d'ya think guys?

GeorgeUK

I would have a look on the CAG forum to see what their legal beagles say on the matter, but keeping searches for a statute barred on your credit file for 6 years possibly 15 years after you last made a payment towards it does not sound right.

I would be very interested to hear what the outcome of this is, if any.

LusciousLuce

jeccapf wrote: »

but these credit reference agencies are getting out of control, they claim a legal right that is not theirs to claim.

Maybe, we're seeing the beginning of a new 'bank charges' case - what d'ya think guys?

I'm so glad I've come across this thread (although it also means that there appear to be a few of us in the same situation which isn't good).

I've recently got hold of my credit files, and Experian & Call Credit are fine - Equifax, though, lists recent searches in table 1 from DCA's such as AktivKapital under reason "outstanding debt". These have been conducted regularly and at all 3 adresses listed on my file - one address i last lived at in 1997, but still appears on my report & is still being searched, and the other I lived at 4 yrs ago, and again still being searched.
If they're in Table 1 as credit searches, I understand these affect my credit worthiness. I have not been in debt for 8years and there is nothing bad on my files other than these entries from AktivKapital. It's been bothering me for a few days, and I thought I'd give Equifax a ring tomorrow to ask them to remove these details. However, having read the above , I'm assuming I've got a battle on my hands :mad: