Experian refusing to remove Notice of Correction

MrChips

Regarding an earlier point, Experian will let you have a second free trial of credit expert so long as the first trial was a while ago. Ring their customer services and ask...

adindas

agrinnall wrote: »

I suggest you read this rule before suggesting others are making things up.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/site/forum-faqs#offtopic

[FONT=&quot]My earlier post are not off-topic. The point here is that this is not a Q&A but a discussion forum. A reply to a thread to a discussion forum is not necessarily a direct answer to a question but could be comments. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Look at other threads in this forum there are many posts are not directly answer the questions of the OPS but comments.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
Here I quote my post no #10:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]“I cannot believe how come the company who should supply a fully trusted data make this blunder?? It is probably the same agent who have recorded other people data. No wonder in this forum there are already reasonable number of people are complaining regarding the accuracy of the CRAs record.

If it is the trivial case like this cannot be trusted how could people trust other much important data which have been recorded by CRAs ?”[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So, I am commenting the blunder which should not be made by a trusted data takers/recorders which is related to the initial post.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In the discussion forum the posts are not only read by the OP but also by other members.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
As far as II am aware the post which is not allowed in this MSE forum and should be reported to MSE team is the one which contain spam, illegal, offensive, racist, libelous,[/FONT]

adindas

savagej wrote: »

James Jones was right it is "worryingly incorrect advice" and he would not have used language like that about his own business given his position unless he was very concerned.

I would make sure you report it to the Information Commissioner, the Office of Fair Trading and the Advertising Standards Authority as Experian are concerned about a large fine coming their way before a member of staff tried to keep up their probably unattainable sales targets by telling you this load of bull****.

They have no real concern about what was said to you, just what they could potentially lose, no matter what they might try and say to placate you.

Edit: the only reason James has even admitted in such strong terms there is a problem is because you have written proof from them that they can't deny.

Just goes to show the lengths they will go to to protect their company when they make a mistake. I can't think of way you could get compensation out of this but if I come up with one I will let you know. Not because I believe you are due any, but because they owe millions in held and compensation but they regularly "blow them off" for want of a better phrase. Leaving them with nothing but a huge mess they caused.

It is most interesting to see just how their Press and Legal Dept.'s work in the backgorund i.e. if we can deny it we will and let them go to hell. Sad but they have given the impression that is what the case is.

Good luck

James

This is also what I believe. If I was in this situation this definitely what I would do.

Dr_Cuckoo3

What's the name of the guy who keeps complaining about Experian on this forum ? - adindas is his name

What's the name of the guy who has never sent a complaint about Experian to the Information Commissioner or Financial Ombudsman ? - adindas is his name

adindas

Dr_Cuckoo3 wrote: »

What's the name of the guy who keeps complaining about Experian on this forum ? - adindas is his name

Incorrect my dear there are already reasonable number of people talking about inaccuracy of CRAs in this forum. It could be argued as incompetency.

Anyway this is a discussion forum where people could raise their arguments.

Dr_Cuckoo3

adindas wrote: »

Incorrect my dear there are already reasonable number of people talking about inaccuracy of CRAs in this forum. It could be argued as incompetency.

Anyway this is a discussion forum where people could raise their arguments.

moaning about it on this forum isn't going to achieve anything - a complaint to the FOS could cost Experian a £500 case fee and would hit them where it hurts

As I said nobody wishes to take their complaint to a complaints body like the FOS or ICO - so Experian have nothing to fear and can continue with their "talk to the hand" policy when dealing with consumers

savagej

This needs to get them more than a £500 fine, Dr C. Honestly, read between the lines.

There is an email they sent the OP saying they will break the law and they have not denied it, but simply accepted it as fact, so I assume they know it is fact.

It is my assumption that they cannot refuse to remove a NoC in general and especially refuse one n these circumstances unless you buy Credit Expert. In these circumstance trying to force someones data out of them for a free trial does not make a slightest bit of difference.

They need reported to all of the companies that regulate them and they need so be ask for a significant amount of compensation for a debt collection charity in my opinion.

But in what way have they been damaged that would lead to an award of compensation, it should also be made a condition of the compensation that Experian advertise somewhere prominent that they made this error and what to do it if happens again. In order that they can be scared and properly scared financial on this situation and financial and losing their license on the next.

The person who wrote the email saying "you must take out CE" must also get a good lawyer as they are going to do everything to try and pass the buck to them,. So they need a solicitor to make sure they are properly represented and not used as a scapegoat from company policy.

This is actually a pretty serious matter in terms of Experian's business and following the 1973 Act I think it is.

If James Jones replies to this email again i would be very surprised, but I have also had a copy made of it, so that someone can forward it onto the regulators should the OP get made an offer and choose to accept it, which is all well and good and I hope they get a good amount.

Dr_Cuckoo3

savagej wrote: »

I would make sure you report it to the Information Commissioner, the Office of Fair Trading and the Advertising Standards Authority as Experian are concerned about a large fine coming their way before a member of staff tried to keep up their probably unattainable sales targets by telling you this load of bull****.

The problem with the Information Commissioner is that they expect the public to use the Data Controller's complaints procedure before they will look into the matter and if the Data Controller rectifies that matter then they will not become involved even though the CRA is no doubt continuing to systematically abuse numerous unknowledgeable consumers who do not have the ability to challenge the CRA

The CRA's are engaged in numerous improper practices - one obvious example is the application form that they use for postal credit file requests
http://www.experian.co.uk/downloads/consumer/cfa.pdf

"We will check your details with the records we hold and share with fraud prevention agencies. If false or inaccurate information is provided and fraud is identified, we will record this and details will be passed to the other fraud prevention agencies. Law enforcement agencies may access and use this information.
We and other organisations may also access and use this information to prevent fraud and money laundering, for example, when:
􀁳 Checking details on applications for credit and credit related or other facilities
􀁳 Managing credit and credit related accounts or facilities
􀁳 Recovering debt
􀁳 Checking details on proposals and claims for all types of insurance
􀁳 Checking details of job applicants and employees"

!!!!!!? - The Data Protection Act requires the Data Controller to provide the information held by the CRA for £2 (no strings attached) and the information provided in the request should only be used for that purpose - not checking details of job applicants and employees etc


Now that the CRA's are covered by the Financial Ombudsman http://www.experian.co.uk/downloads/consumer/FOS%20-%20Experian%20Complaint%20Handling%20Procedure.pdf there is an avenue for obtaining compensation with little effort and at no cost

The notice of correction would have been covered if it was done using the paid/trial service

Dr_Cuckoo3

savagej wrote: »

But in what way have they been damaged that would lead to an award of compensation, it should also be made a condition of the compensation that Experian advertise somewhere prominent that they made this error and what to do it if happens again. In order that they can be scared and properly scared financial on this situation and financial and losing their license on the next.

I appreciate that it would be difficult to obtain damages using a court if there has been distress but no quantifiable damage

The FOS can award compensation for distress and inconvenience though and although I am not a fan of the FOS there has not been any mention of the CRA's being covered by the FOS on this forum (and I am uncertain which areas are covered by the FOS - Experian informed me that everything is covered)

"why does the ombudsman use "fair and reasonable" as the basis for deciding cases, rather than the strict legal approach?"
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/faq/businesses/answers/decide_cases_a7.html

I would recommend using the FOS if possible (£500 case fee )

I would like to see Experian receive the same attention that CPP is experiencing at the moment

izools

cos wrote: »

I don't think any manual interventions will be triggered

By definition any applicant who has a NOC on their credit file has their application passed for manual review and won't be automatically approved / declined at point of applicaion.

Whilst Experian have a legal obligation to remove the NOC even if you don't have an active subscription to Credit Expert, you would need to put the request in writing as they won't speak to people over the phone who don't have a membership.