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

VictimOfImpersonation

I just had a blind flash of inspiration.

In other threads I've been beating my head against these past few days various posters have argued that CRAs work in their current format for them. So clearly they are arguing that some purpose is being served.

In hundreds of other threads since this part of MSE Forums was started, we read about incorrect entries, weird alerts and about fraud.

I have experienced all sides, in that yes I have secured credit without leaving my keyboard thanks, and yes I have suffered ID fraud (twice that I know about), and yes I have had weird alerts that worried me and turned out to be mistakes (had one just last week in fact) and of course yes I have incorrect entries on my CRA files right now.

Now, another tack then, one of the purposes that CRAs all sell to us constantly is their Alert service. Be alerted if a new credit agreement is set up in your name for example. Sign Up for Alerts.

The blinding flash here is that I have never read on MSE about anyone receiving an Alert of possible fraud that actually was fraud?

Can posters please say if a CRA has ever helped them with exactly that?

I really would be interested to know if they fulfill that purpose at least for some people?

In my case they have failed completely. The alert I got from Equifax last week was headed "New Credit Agreement Alert" or very similar but they have apologised saying that actually I caused it simply by requesting an updated credit report online :rotfl:

Yet as you will have read in my other threads, a fraudulent application for a new card WAS made in my name 2 months ago (with an incorrect date of birth and totally false other details including some other poor sod's bank account detail) and no-one alerted anyone

The first I knew something was up was when the card provider routinely sent me notification of a £12 over credit limit charge. That doesn't exactly cut it as an alert.

Anyway, has anyone out there actually received a real alert that turned out to be a first notification of real fraud?

VictimOfImpersonation

What no-one ?

meer53

VictimOfImpersonation wrote: »

What no-one ?

Hundreds of people. They just can't be arsed replying.

VictimOfImpersonation

And you know this because ?

How about this:

Did you know over 4 million people in the UK have been affected by identity fraud?

It takes an individual an average of 7 months to realise that their details have been stolen and, with an average loss of nearly £1,200.

On another point of purpose i.e. the supposed protection of my data, why have I just heard Mr Henry Raine of Wonga recorded as smugly telling the Pay Day Loan Companies Select Committee that Wonga only started their own database after having bought the raw data from CallCredit?

And who is this person Adam Freeman from "Mr Lender"? What the hell is he doing accessing our CRA data? He talks and looks like an Essex barrow boy.

How on earth is my CRA data protected when it is being sold to shysters ?

sirwiggum

My own bugbear is with some of the rules.

A default drops off after 6 years, fair enough.

An arrangement to pay that maybe lasts 4 or 5 years is on the file for 6 years after the last payment. And to creditors these are black marks, default-lite.

The days of my parents or grandparents generation going to the bank and having a word with the manager are long gone.
These days it's all 'computer says no'.

VictimOfImpersonation

sirwiggum wrote: »

...The days of my parents or grandparents generation going to the bank and having a word with the manager are long gone.

I think you are right ... with the mess of CRA data that is barely contained by a sausage skin of spin by banksters, other insider interests and even government, any 'normal' bank manager would have the same trouble working out which turkey was missing from where as Capt. [STRIKE]Mannering[/STRIKE]*Mainwaring!

Unlike Dads Army, not one of the latest breed have the gumption to make a breast of it - it's all a dogs dinner!

Gordon_Hose

*Capt. Mainwaring.

FYI.

VictimOfImpersonation

As it is very much a question relating to questions about CRAs' fitness for purpose, I thought it might be useful to link to JuicyJesus' thread relating to a decision he says he found on the FOS website and has headed his thread: Experian admit their "credit score" is pointless since lenders don't see it.

The Ombudsman's decision he is referring to included these words

However, there was a further problem with Mr J’s CreditExpert account. Despite no significant change in his financial circumstances, Mr J’s CreditExpert credit score fluctuated between April and September 2012 as follows:

• 7 April 2012: 996 (excellent)
• 21 May 2012: 976 (excellent)
• 28 May 2012: 913 (good)
• 8 June 2012: 913 (good)
• 2 August 2012: 967 (excellent)
• 17 September 2012: 999 (excellent)

Experian says that this “ incorrect credit report summary ” was due to a systems error. I accept Experian’s argument that the credit score is seen only by the consumer (not any potential creditor), and that Mr J did not apply for credit during this period so there was no obvious detriment. However, again I understand why Mr J was worried by this, especially given the earlier mistake regarding the CIFAS warning. I also understand why Mr J would want to make sure this was sorted out so felt unable to cancel his CreditExpert subscription.

VictimOfImpersonation

Dear mods

Is this thread suitable to be moved to the Trial Campaigns Forum, please?

It is three whole weeks since fraud was established by one of my card providers who had unbelievably issued a new card to my name and address with absolutely no other details correct. They had made an instant online decision using a direct link with Experian and the false data (e.g. completely wrong date of birth and some other random victim's bank account detail which was not challenged).

None of the 3 CRAs have issued any alert at any time since they received details of the application, or even since the fraud was discovered and reported by me two months after the card was issued. I'd received a routine over credit limit charge letter. I queried it, and gradually the enormity of the security hole has emerged.

One CRA (Equifax) looks like it has remained oblivious to the new account so was unable to issue an alert per my alert subscription with them. The other two still hold the false data against my name with no correction, and it is as I have said, three whole weeks since fraud was established by the card provider (a big one which might surprise readers).

None of the players including my card provider have yet registered my details with CIFAS. The card provider cocked up the fraud report and applied the wrong status to the account and actually triggered a new card although I don't know if that got sent - I don't have it, but I do have another letter now with the second card number and another £24 of overlimit and late payment charges.

We have also established in another thread that CRA credit scores which we are asked to pay for are pointless.

There are numerous FOS ombudsman decisions which show that inaccurate data is a common feature and causes harm to consumers.

There are many complaints in the Credit Files forum about missing credit account data where no history for someone starting out or rebuilding their credit is as bad as a bad history.

Tonight we even have Experian company representative applying his Thanks vote to a post which ridicules my observations and diverts attention away from the CRA - by implication suggesting that a CRA is not responsible for the data they get given and record against our names.

A CRA is a data controller. Reckless obtention and retention of data is an offence under 55(1) of DPA 1998, and some officers of the offending companies can be held personally liable. Maybe they feel untouchable ? If a bank tells another data controller to jump off a cliff, do they? Apparently yes they always do. It makes a mckery of the concept of ID Fraud Protection and accurate credit scoring, or even accurate anything.

QED CRAs are not fit for purpose and do need reform. An MSE campaign to achieve it would clearly be in the public interest.

Joe_Bloggs

Allegedly there was a poster who took on a credit reference agency in court and won. Forensic financial investigation was part of what they did as a day job. Unfortunately I cant remember their user name and even if I did their posts have been expunged from post Martin MSE history.
J_B.
Some MSE old lags may still remenber.