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

VictimOfImpersonation

Well newbieboy's post may have been well written in the same vein that spin doctors are usually in command of the English they use, but of course informed readers can see through posts like that and declare them a diversion for truth-seekers and generally of no essential substance.

I am not "after" anyone, innovate, other than the CRAs and the wholly discredited financial services industry which they serve.

Dr_Cuckoo_3 wrote:

me wrote:

...recording of irrelevant and secret (coded) data.

why don't you elaborate on this and state whether you consider this to be compliant with regulations etc and whether the ICO is aware and approves of this ?

I have given examples of motor insurers who are using CRAs as we know not what exactly in the context of motor insurance quotations. I also have a number of entries on my file which fail to identify the company involved and which I have had to decipher myself only to find for example that a "New Credit Agreement notification" with a code instead of a lender name turns out to have been put there by a purchaser of old credit card books which included my details from an old credit card account that had been closed years previously. That is why I dare to use the term irrelevant. Generally this information and the description the CRA uses for the type of entry can only be decrypted by an insider. That's why I dare to use the term "secret". I think we have seen enough of the types of search and entry and alert services and online direct feeds to financial services clients to see that CRAs are being used in a myriad of commercially secret ways to transact our data with financial services companies.

Because I have a compliance background, I would no doubt have a field day if I was given open access even just to everything they ever transacted and stored in my name, and I am a simple case with no credit defaults ever, but a lifetime of financial services transactions which are very untidily recorded by the spectrum of bad to bloody awful providers that is all we've got left now in the financial services industry. I can't recommend a single financial services provider I use. How sad is that?

I am not really into discussing whether the industry is compliant with regulations because any business that gets analysed in that fashion has self-evidently failed the customer base once it starts trying to use the regulations as a defence.

On the subject though of regulators, the ICO clearly has no teeth in the same way that OFT used to have no teeth. OFT has at least grown some in the last couple of years but only takes very selective bites out of politically sensitive targets. I guess we simply don't have the resources to chase down all the bad guys, and the biggest bad guys just negotiate their own penalty fines. It would be good if ICO did grab a few biggies by the short and curlies even if the penalty fines have to be negotiated, but we haven't seen it yet have we?

Tin foil hats, Dr_Cuckoo_3? By which you mean what if it is not a veiled insult however softly placed!? You have no reason to accuse me of paranoia. I am one of the few posters offering evidence to back my assertions. If you were really well-meaning you should instead be highlighting the usual foil tactics used to distract from uncomfortable truths. There's plenty of that in the thread to comment upon, so why label me as paranoid when there is dishonest spin and bluster to be highlighted?

innovate

Dr_Cuckoo3 wrote:

I know which subjects you are knowledgeable on and which your are not .

).

Now that is very interesting. You obviously have super-natural powers since we have never met, and I have never shared with you (or anyone else on MSE) what my areas of expertise are.

Dr_Cuckoo3

VictimOfImpersonation wrote: »

recording of irrelevant and secret (coded) data.

The secret coded data I was seeking elaboration on was - "Delphi and CII" to be honest

I don't think it would pass a scrutiny test , but most people (eg innovate) don't know what it is.

ICO are in bed with CRA's.

I should point out that I have not been disadvantaged by any of the above

Dr_Cuckoo3

innovate wrote: »

Now that is very interesting. You obviously have super-natural powers since we have never met, and I have never shared with you (or anyone else on MSE) what my areas of expertise are.

Your area of expertise is savings and matters of appeal to those with significant savings and you have recently discovered that current accounts pay more than savings accounts (you are not a "stoozer" as far as I am aware)

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Buzby wrote: »

Funnily enough, I don't see it as my job to assist CRA's hold my data - indeed I do what I can to ensure no matching and am delighted to see very little of my dealings (good or bad) reported.

Ways to achieve this include, but are not limited to, providing a middle initial with 26 to choose from, this is useful in knowing who is passing on your details to third parties. Reverse your DoB (the US format) or just work your way through a bunch of years with random dates. Your excuse? You are protecting your personal data from misuse by third parties.

I'm old enough to recall 'Over 21' was simply a box you ticked, now even if you want a magazine subscription a DoB is asked for. It's none of their business, unless they plan to sell on my details and if so, their first casualty is accuracy.

It gives me a warm glow.

I echo this. I am sick and tired of companies wanting my private data. For a number of years now I use a false name on my Electoral Form and I never give my date of birth out unless it is totally necessary.

Th gas company wanted my DOB. Why does it matter how old I am to have gas? I always use the oldest year possible on any pull down menus.

So as far as I know the CRAs have a load of !!!!!!!! data sent from me.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Dr_Cuckoo3 wrote: »

current accounts pay more than savings accounts

And that is another thing that needs to be looked into. Current accounts becoming the new savings accounts through marketing ploys of "high interest" and "cashback" sweeteners.

If a bank can offer 3% on a current account it sure as hell should be doing that for a normal instant access savings account.

And I would go to the Santander 3% account in a heartbeat but I know it reports to the CRA's and that goes totally against my current principles on the matter. A savings account on the other hand would not report.

I may be paranoid but it seems a funny coincidence savers are being sucked into "credit reportable" accounts that feed the CRA's with data.

Dr_Cuckoo3

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/other/scottish-century.pdf




In addition, try to keep things relevant , that is what I mean by "tin foil hat" - the person in the FSA link appears similar to the OP

If you have a criticism- pick something easy to prove to start with

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Back in 2004 I was victim of CRA nonsense through a firm quite incorrectly listing that I had defaulted. It was an immense struggle getting the data corrected. The CRA always siding with the company who - was a communications firm - who couldn't or wouldn't communicate with me or the CRA. The department that fed the CRA with the bull didn't speak to the public and ignored all my letters. When I eventually got the default removed the company kept putting it back every month and each month I had to get it removed. In doing this I was paying the CRA's a lot of money to subscribe to their monitoring services.

They are lousy good for nothing cash cows.

Very frustrating all that was and since then I try to have as little to do with CRA's as possible. I have no accounts that report to them.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Dr_Cuckoo3 wrote: »

Your area of expertise is savings

I wouldn't say "expertise". More area of interest.

Dr_Cuckoo3

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

I wouldn't say "expertise". More area of interest.

I do find them very knowledgeable on the subject to be honest , I notice they don't buy Tesco gift cards from the Tesco petrol station with their 123 card though