Double Default

kingstreet

Hi folks.

I have a client's credit file in front of me - Experian copy if you are watching James.

There's a double default. One by the original creditor LTSB on 17/06/09 then by a debt collection agency, Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd on the same date and for the same amount.

Borrower has added a NOC, but basically this is looking like two separate defaults.

It was my understanding you couldn't/shouldn't be defaulted twice for the same debt.

Thoughts?

ACG

Im not sure on the legalities of it but ive spoken with a couple of lenders in the past who would only count one of the defaults when reviewing the case. Saffron are one of the lenders who spring to mind.

Dave_Ham

Hi Kings.

You are correct, a default can and should only be listed once. I suspect our friends at Lowell have done this in error and a couple of letters to them and Experian should get it removed relatively quickly.

Good luck

ValHaller

Dave_Ham wrote: »

Hi Kings.

You are correct, a default can and should only be listed once. I suspect our friends at Lowell have done this in error and a couple of letters to them and Experian should get it removed relatively quickly.

Good luck

DFW's will tell you that when a debt is sold on, the buyer puts their own default on - but the original should be removed.

kingstreet, your client should be taking this up with LTSB Lowells and Experian rather than just adding the NoC

kingstreet

ValHaller wrote: »

kingstreet, your client should be taking this up with LTSB Lowells and Experian rather than just adding the NoC

That's what I thought too. I don't like NOCs. They don't really tackle the issue, but I don't think this client realises he should not have two defaults for the same debt.

Dave_Ham

ValHaller wrote: »

DFW's will tell you that when a debt is sold on, the buyer puts their own default on - but the original should be removed.

kingstreet, your client should be taking this up with LTSB Lowells and Experian rather than just adding the NoC

Really?

I was always under the impression (and I have no facts to back this up) that it was always the earlier creditor who should default and Lowells et al can only default if not already done.

This would lead to a bank defaulting for non-payment and sell on, at which point the default could be on the credit file for nearly 12 years if the dates were optimised....?

ValHaller

Dave_Ham wrote: »

Really?

I was always under the impression (and I have no facts to back this up) that it was always the earlier creditor who should default and Lowells et al can only default if not already done.

This would lead to a bank defaulting for non-payment and sell on, at which point the default could be on the credit file for nearly 12 years if the dates were optimised....?

DFW's encounter this issue montonously. The new default must have the same date as the old one, so it does not lead to extension of the default.

I think in terms of the Credit Reference Agency data model, the intent is to change the name of the holder of the default - but because the holder of the default (in this case firstly LTSB and then Lowell) has the power to amend or remove it, it is actually implemented by adding a new default and removing the old, so only one party is ever in charge of it

However this goes wrong when the old default is not removed or if the new default is dated later than the old one. Neither of these should happen.