Does a CCJ or default stay forever?

Gmac2011_2

I was looking to apply for a new lower rate card ( Santander) Asda Reward.
The application said if you've ever had a CCJ or default you won't be accepted. I had 2 CCJs but they are not on my Credit File as the 6 years are passed. Does the fact that I had them at all mean I cannot apply for cards or loans when this is stated in their application details?

Adelphi

Hi, I have a default notice issued on one my credit card accounts and will interested in your replies...I'm new to this and would like some advice as well.

Curr946

6 years for both.

Once they are off, you should be ok. Just select no.

balmk

Hello and welcome Newbies!

CCJs and Defaults (along with all other information whether good or bad) will remian on your credit file (there are 3 agencies - Experian, Equifax, Callcredit) for 6 years from the date of the event.

Example:

Default issued 01/01/2000
Removed from credit file 01/01/2006

This information notwithstanding, you are required to answer all questions asked of you on the application form honestly.

Hope that helps

Experian_company_representative

balmk is spot on! There will be no record of these debts after six years, perhaps apart from on the internal records of the companies the debts were originally owed to.

James Jones

chanz4

which also is against data protection to keep data longer than is required.

sharpy2010

chanz4 wrote: »

which also is against data protection to keep data longer than is required.

But surely if you owed them a significant sum, then they'll require keeping the information about that so that they can ensure you don't do it to them again?

I can't see that them keeping the information for this purpose would be unfair.

chattychappy

Gmac2011 wrote: »

The application said if you've ever had a CCJ or default you won't be accepted.

Curr946 wrote: »

6 years for both.

Once they are off, you should be ok. Just select no.

If they actually ask whether you've ever had a CCJ/default and you reply "no" when you've had one, then you are committing a fraud offence. Whether this is discovered or not is another matter.

sharpy2010 wrote: »

But surely if you owed them a significant sum, then they'll require keeping the information about that so that they can ensure you don't do it to them again?

I can't see that them keeping the information for this purpose would be unfair.

Agree with this analysis. Don't think the DPA has any explicit time limit.

Curr946

chattychappy wrote: »

If they actually ask whether you've ever had a CCJ/default and you reply "no" when you've had one, then you are committing a fraud offence. Whether this is discovered or not is another matter.



Agree with this analysis. Don't think the DPA has any explicit time limit.

I'm so sure on that. The questions are normally "do you have any ccjs or defaults " the answer would be no.

If they ask you have you ever had ccjs or default then this is unfair and not in the spirit of rehabilitation. Im sure OFT would be interested in those companies requesting irrelevant information, when legally all traces of said event should have been destroyed

jonesMUFCforever

Surely a lender can ask whatever it wants of a new customer?
It lays down its own rules - you play by them or look elsewhere - so OP if you have been asked whether you have EVER had a CCJ you have to answer yes.
This might well lead to a refusal - you can then appeal so an underwriter looks at it manually - but at the end of the day if they don't want former defaulters then it is up to them.

chattychappy

Curr946 wrote: »

I'm so sure on that. The questions are normally "do you have any ccjs or defaults " the answer would be no.

But the answer would be yes, unless they specify a time limit.

Curr946 wrote: »

If they ask you have you ever had ccjs or default then this is unfair and not in the spirit of rehabilitation.

Applying for credit when you have unpaid debts elsewhere could be said to be unfair. There is no specific limitation on enforcement of a CCJ. (I'm assuming we are talking about unsatisfied CCJs.) If the judgment has been satisfied, then less clearcut, but I still think a company would be entitled to ask the question.

Curr946 wrote: »

Im sure OFT would be interested in those companies requesting irrelevant information, when legally all traces of said event should have been destroyed

OFT interested or not, it would be fraud by misrepresentation. But I don't agree that we have established that the information must have been removed - besides, the information being removed doesn't preclude it being asked for again - and clearly the lender might take the view that the information is relevant.