UK Credit Reference Agencies Unfit For Purpose and must be reformed - Discuss

VictimOfImpersonation

The motion is that UK Credit Reference Agencies Have Become Unfit For Purpose and Must Urgently Be Reformed.

I have many reasons (and evidence) to propose the motion ranging from poor access control to bad data management and recording of irrelevant and secret (coded) data.

Anyone else have strong opinions for or against?

jonesMUFCforever

When you think there are probably hundreds of MILLIONS of data recorded every year I think this is as good as it is likely to get.

In forty years I have never had any bother from what they have down against my name.

As long as it is clear to both parties how and when to amend or remove data - which I think it is - it is fine by me.

VictimOfImpersonation

CRAs enjoy multi-billion turnovers. I am not impressed by a layman's interpretation of the difficulty of their data processing tasks. Not sure CRAs have been a feature of the landscape for 40 years yet either!

I was attacked by identity fraudsters nearly 4 years ago who started the attack by obtaining a credit report in my name over the internet.

There was a security hole in the CallCredit system. I have read very little about it but as I believe identity fraud is largely serious organised crime in the UK, I imagine 4 years ago, thousands had their credit reports downloaded by fraudsters.

Contrary to your suggestion, I would say it is far from clear who is permitted to add and delete data or how or when. Even Equifax are guilty of telling me at the end of October in "deleted search enquiry" "alerts" that searches made by motor insurers who were simply quoting for my motor insurance in February had been deleted, but when I downloaded my credit report recently, the searches were still there. They should never have been permitted in the first place. I never authorised them. I remember refusing one insurer that notified me that they would do a search and told them to stick it. Four other companies did the searches without disclosing the fact.

At about the same time I had a "Beneficiary Search" by a division of Capita. I have no business with Capita. They have not written and no-one has in fact written to tell me why they were sniffing around my Credit Reference Agency files.

I have recently been the victim of ID fraud again (fraudulent additional credit card application made over the internet with one of my existing providers) and the large bank involved has not even caused a New Credit Agreement alert on my file when it was opened many weeks ago, and now they know it was fraudulent has not yet caused any CIFAS marker to show either (despite telling me they would do so).

Hence my proposed motion that CFAs are not fit for purpose. Records are not being maintained correctly by our largest banks, and nefarious providers, prospective providers and government sponsored sniffers are being granted access for no good reason.

Stephen_C.

Having recently requested my statutory report from Experian, and having to wait 7 days (and counting) to receive my "pin letter", I can agree with this.

Thrugelmir

CRA's enable people to obtain finance at highly competitive rates of interest. So yes they do serve a useful purpose. People forget how pedantic the pre technology processes were, and how slow they were.

Better to explain the chip on your shoulder. As initially everyone starts on the same level playing field.

VictimOfImpersonation

Thrugelmir wrote: »

CRA's enable people to obtain finance at highly competitive rates of interest.

Are you a PR mouthpiece for a discredited industry? What nonsense you write about competitive rates of interest. The credit lending industry operates as a cartel so that means there is nothing competitive about it in the first place. The rates are disgracefully high at the moment.

People forget how pedantic the pre technology processes were, and how slow they were.

Pedantic ? Do you mean "responsible"? Slow? Do you mean "Considered"?

Better to explain the chip on your shoulder.

What? Are you taking a pop? About what?

As initially everyone starts on the same level playing field.

Starts what? This discussion? I started with a bank account, a credit card and then then an endowment policy and a final salary pension, and house insurance, then another two or three endowments, then another two or three pension products, some extra life insurance, some more credit cards and bank accounts and finally I arrived in 2013 with a wealth of financial services experience both as a customer and as a practitioner.
What's your feeble excuse for taking a pop rather than engaging properly in the discussion, Thrugelmir?

nidO

VictimOfImpersonation wrote: »

Pedantic ? Do you mean "responsible"? Slow? Do you mean "Considered"?

No, he means "getting refused for a loan because the guy in the bank didn't like the shirt you're wearing, the colour of your hair, the way you looked at him when you walked in the door, the !!!!!! DVD you bought a few weeks ago showing on your bank statement, or any of the other totally inconsistent reasons people would get rejected for credit, or given absurd interest rates, in the days before the consistency of credit checking became the norm".
Oh okay so you wear a nice shirt, your hair's nice, you smiled warmly, and the DVD was a joke present for a friend. Great, you get your loan, itll be with you in a month. Oh, you needed it by the end of the week? sucks for you.

safestored4

According to an article in the Independant a few weeks ago the amount of personal debt in the UK presently stands at £1.43 trillion, close to its all time high. The accumulation of this will very largly have involved the use of the Credit Rating Agencies and it would appear that in general the system works well. Given the sheer volume of transactions mistakes are bound to occur but to describe the system as unfit for purpose is patently incorrect.

VictimOfImpersonation

safestored4 wrote: »

According to an article in the Independant a few weeks ago the amount of personal debt in the UK presently stands at £1.43 trillion, close to its all time high. The accumulation of this will very largly have involved the use of the Credit Rating Agencies and it would appear that in general the system works well.

And you are offering that this is a good thing?Easy credit is the reason the banking system became abused and the western economic system almost collapsed. Bad debt was sold as a secure asset. Credit lenders and banks were no longer interested in responsible lending, merely in the sort of lending which they could manipulate using statistical models, take a cut of turnover, dump lending risk and then churn it all again.

Given the sheer volume of transactions mistakes are bound to occur but to describe the system as unfit for purpose is patently incorrect.

You are another who is impressed by big numbers, and one who believes that collateral damage is a bi-product of acceptable business I see. Did you ever do any higher mathematics or data science before you became impressed and started preaching what impressed you?

safestored4

Why bother posting if all you can so is insult people who do not agree with the thrust of your argument?

Thrugelmir

safestored4 wrote: »

Why bother posting if all you can so is insult people who do not agree with the thrust of your argument?

As I said previously appears to have a chip on the shoulder.