The Sub Prime Credit Thread - Part IV

never-in-doubt

izools wrote: »

I didn't lie.

I stated in the dispute text "I do not recall providing permission for this search to be performed"... ergo, I am not stating "You did this without my permission, eat my disputez" - I'm just saying "I've got a bad memory, are you sure?"

Seems to have done the trick with five of them so far :beer:

You need to be careful, doing this creates a pattern and I can categorically confirm this will come back and bite you real hard cos any of the companies can add a cifas against you for blatant lying, thus I stated previously I do not entirely believe that they are removing all these queries mate - sorry but I know a hell-of-a-lot about CRA's and their back office systems and one thing is for sure, they do not simply remove searches. In fact, for clarity i'll advise the process for Equifax as this is who you refer to...

I'm not trying to call you out or anything but you're kinda leading people to do something that simply doesn't happen, maybe you're the exception cos of your address fault and they think it may be easier to remove the entry as opposed to a libel claim, I really don't know but anyway... process below (Equifax)

1. You register a NOD
2. They confirm receipt using 'e-response'
3. They then send an online copy of your completed NOD (the form you filled in online) to the lender and ask the lender to substantiate the claim
4. The lender then confirms that the applicant did apply
5. The CRA decline the NOD based on the reason 'we have confirmed with the lender that the entry is correct, please contact them directly if you have any other queries'

However, lets assume that you then wrote back again saying 'I never made the application, remove the search' - the CRA will simply send everything direct to the lender and refuse your NOD claim.

Basically, you're not asking anyone to investigate fraud so when the CRA asks the lender 'did this person apply' - the lender will simply respond with 'yes' - thus the NOD is refused. However, lets assume you genuinely never applied then you'd be expected to approach the lender directly and argue it with them - chances are the data will mismatch and they will then remove the entry - if it does however match, then they will cifas you as a cat4 (attempted fraud - facility refused).

That mate, is the way it works - no deviation whatsoever.

wizzywig27

NID - Due to problems with Orange (mentioned previously) they credited my account with £60 - that means I dont have a bill to pay until May - will this be recognised as a payment from me when reporting to CRA's?

seeya23

wizzywig27 wrote: »

NID - Due to problems with Orange (mentioned previously) they credited my account with £60 - that means I dont have a bill to pay until May - will this be recognised as a payment from me when reporting to CRA's?

yes it wlll

izools

never-in-doubt wrote: »

You need to be careful, doing this creates a pattern and I can categorically confirm this will come back and bite you real hard cos any of the companies can add a cifas against you for blatant lying, thus I stated previously I do not entirely believe that they are removing all these queries mate - sorry but I know a hell-of-a-lot about CRA's and their back office systems and one thing is for sure, they do not simply remove searches. In fact, for clarity i'll advise the process for Equifax as this is who you refer to...

I'm not trying to call you out or anything but you're kinda leading people to do something that simply doesn't happen, maybe you're the exception cos of your address fault and they think it may be easier to remove the entry as opposed to a libel claim, I really don't know but anyway... process below (Equifax)

1. You register a NOD
2. They confirm receipt using 'e-response'
3. They then send an online copy of your completed NOD (the form you filled in online) to the lender and ask the lender to substantiate the claim
4. The lender then confirms that the applicant did apply
5. The CRA decline the NOD based on the reason 'we have confirmed with the lender that the entry is correct, please contact them directly if you have any other queries'

However, lets assume that you then wrote back again saying 'I never made the application, remove the search' - the CRA will simply send everything direct to the lender and refuse your NOD claim.

Basically, you're not asking anyone to investigate fraud so when the CRA asks the lender 'did this person apply' - the lender will simply respond with 'yes' - thus the NOD is refused. However, lets assume you genuinely never applied then you'd be expected to approach the lender directly and argue it with them - chances are the data will mismatch and they will then remove the entry - if it does however match, then they will cifas you as a cat4 (attempted fraud - facility refused).

That mate, is the way it works - no deviation whatsoever.

Miles30

never-in-doubt wrote: »

You need to be careful, doing this creates a pattern and I can categorically confirm this will come back and bite you real hard cos any of the companies can add a cifas against you for blatant lying

That mate, is the way it works - no deviation whatsoever.

Cheers mate! I agree with you 100%.

benoit

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Hiya

Is this Southgate, i.e. New Southgate (near Arnos Grove tube)...?

I used to live near there, in Whetstone....

Nope, old Southgate, next stop on the picadilly line from Arnos Grove. I have been thinking the Bank of Cyprus are probably wondering where all the sudden applications are coming from being they were quite a 'tight' set up. LOL

izools

Miles30 wrote: »

Cheers mate! I agree with you 100%.

I didn't claim to have not made the applications.

I stated, verbatim, "I do not recall providing permission for this search to be performed, kindly confirm with the creditor whether this search can be removed".

Never did I claim not to have made the application. They are free to say "Well, you did" and that's fine, I'll leave it. Capital One said they feel the information is valid and I won't dispute that. Some didn't, which is great.

I very much doubt I'll get CIFASed for having a bad memory :rotfl:

Miles30

izools wrote: »

I didn't lie.

I stated, verbatim, "I do not recall providing permission for this search to be performed, kindly confirm with the creditor whether this search can be removed".

Never did I claim not to have made the application. They are free to say "Well, you did" and that's fine, I'll leave it. Capital One said they feel the information is valid and I won't dispute that. Some didn't, which is great.

I am just worried about getting to the point where they will notice a pattern - you dispute all your searches. Dont you think it will sound the alarm bells with some lenders?

izools

Miles30 wrote: »

I am just worried about getting to the point where they will notice a pattern - you dispute all your searches. Dont you think it will sound the alarm bells with some lenders?

Well Equifax will sure notice a pattern - I asked them to check the validity of all my searches with the respective creditors - I did not at any point say "I am adament that this information is invalid" or "I dispute the accuracy of this information", let alone "I didn't make an application to these guys".

All I did was state that I don't recall giving permission for the search to be performed and could they kindly check with the creditor to make sure it's all valid.

Where in that have I attempted fraud or falsely accused a CRA / Creditor of anything? Certainly there is no justification for a CIFAS.

never-in-doubt

Miles30 wrote: »

Dont you think it will sound the alarm bells with some lenders?

It will sooner than later - it always does. Lenders don't just remove searches, they have no need to unless fraud in which case they will request proof of said fraud...

Remember the CRA can also advise the lender that there 'is a pattern of NOD's' - it's well within their remit as data processor.