Taking The Fight Back

hicskis

Please natweststaffmember if you have nothing constructive to add to this thread please go back to your hardship claims.

hicskis

Today's news:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/creditcards/7245125/Credit-card-holders-face-crippling-interest-rates.html

and this....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/7248357/Barclays-profits-near-double-to-hit-11.6bn.html

It's disgraceful.

esmerellda

Case law has to be made somewhere

I expect there is some case law about inaccurate CRA data reporting.

I know someone recently had a small amount of compensation due to inaccurate reporting affecting his ability to take decent rates on mortgages etc (yorkshire bank debt in dispute, Marlins in accurately reporting) but it was at the threat of court action. I'm sure some must have gone into court for redress just a matter of finding them.

I doubt the banks would allow it to go far enough for precendent setting case law tho as theres a massive heap of inaccurate reporting.

Also I think originally you were looking at this from the banks havent reported enough data to the CRA - thus giving you a better credit score than you should have had had everything been reported correctly - that would be a claim for irresponsible lending I think although the lender wouldnt be at fault, the cmpany who hadnt reported the data would be, and yes it is correct there is no requirement for data to be reported, only that that which is reported is accurate.

With that in mind, I dont think retrospective claims can work - however it can be used as an argument to increase regulation/legislation to make reporting a requirement.

Think it may be impossible unless you concentrate on certain areas of consumers - like those with mental health issues who need protection by having data reported - rather than average consumers who the banks can argue should take responsibility for themselves.

Alsoooooooooo, there are movements to get rid of CRAs and return just to consumer responsibility....and petitions for reducing the period for CRAs to hold data from six to three years - so that will also be a fight against that opposing view.

I;m just thinking outloud really.

natweststaffmember

There is case law which involved a person who was defaulted wrongly and it affected his credit score for years and he won c.£200k. I can't remember who was the claimant but the defendent who lost was GE Capital Bank, I believe.

natweststaffmember

hicskis wrote: »

Please natweststaffmember if you have nothing constructive to add to this thread please go back to your hardship claims.

I don't have any claims, I keep telling you this. You are suggesting things which others read and yet have nothing to back up such stuff. A lot of posters initially were dismissing your ideas, but I thought it was worth a punt on finding out more to see if you had found an argument that was in addition to what was already stated on the forums. If you do not like criticism on ideas then start a website and ban me if I ever join in the discussion, otherwise, accept it and make the argument water tight and perhaps with people willing to try that argument but currently the advice you are giving varies from run away to CAB so either deal with the criticism with valid arguments or we can have a discussion which we are having FWIW.

hicskis

You've made some very interesting and valid points - esmerellda.

hicskis

Some good comments by esmerellda:

By esmerellda:
"I doubt the banks would allow it to go far enough for precendent setting case law tho as theres a massive heap of inaccurate reporting."

Maybe - but institutions can be quite stubbon and often fight points of Law.

"Think it may be impossible unless you concentrate on certain areas of consumers - like those with mental health issues who need protection by having data reported - rather than average consumers who the banks can argue should take responsibility for themselves."

I kind of was - those that have been lent more than they can possibly afford. I've seen the TV shows where people were lent in excess of 100,000 pounds (not in mortgages) when they were only earning 10,000.

It would take one extreme case such as this to set precedent i.e Case Law that could be beneficial to others.

Does anyone out there - particulaly Lawyers know of any cases that may be of help here?

hicskis

I would never ban you natweststaffmember - freedom of speach and all that - any anyhows - you brighten up my day

natweststaffmember

hicskis wrote: »

I would never ban you natweststaffmember - freedom of speach and all that - any anyhows - you brighten up my day

You might not, but one of the other forums(CAG) have banned me since January 27th and I have yet to receive a credible explanation. Unfortunately for them, if their allegation of multiple usernames was correct, I would already be re registered. As it is, I am not since they have made their views clear.

Not sure I like that light bulb idea though

hicskis

Looking for UK preferably English Case Law (natweststaffmember) - did you see what esmerellda sent me on my other thread?