Double Default Entry - Experian

kingstreet

Hi,

A client has an Experian file and Lloyds defaulted him on 17/02/2009 for a current account.

There's also a duplicate entry for the same amount/date by Lowell.

AIUI you can't be defaulted for the same debt twice. Is it down to Experian to remove it on request, or does it have to go via the lender/debt collector?

The client has added a NoC regarding the cause of the default and it's been "full & finalled" with a part-payment. However, I don't think it should be recorded twice.

Can anyone tell me if I'm right and if Experian should remove one of the entries?

Thanks.

fermi

Does the original one say something like "debt assigned" or "debt assigned to CAIS member"?

If it does, then it is OK to have 2 defaults as only YOU see the original one (sort of) and that is how Experian show sold on accounts.

If not, then it's usually up to the companies to remove the old entry.

Technically Experian can remove a default themselves (despite the many claims people make to the contrary), but to do so they have to have to presented with cast iron proof that it is invalid, and most of the time they hedge on the side of querying it with the lender in question instead and going with what they reply.

kingstreet

There's nothing visible like this;-

Does the original one say something like "debt assigned" or "debt assigned to CAIS member"?

I'm going to suggest to the client that he writes to Experian, as phone calls appear to be a waste of time...

fermi

If there is nothing like that then Lloyds should have removed their when Lowells put their entry on.

Raise a dispute via Experian and probably best for full measure via Lloyds as well.

kingstreet

Will do, thanks,

kingstreet

I've now found out that there is a marker on the original Lloyds default which says "Debt assigned to CAIS member Start date 01/10/2012.

Experian is saying a search carried out by a lender will only reveal the default once and that the second record is only there for the debtor's information.

fermi

Yes, that is why I asked. Experian introduced that and those markers a while back.

So it should be OK to have both as long as lenders do not see the old one as well as the new. Exerian say they shoudln't be seen for scoring or applications.

Has the presence of both been a problem with an application to a lender then? Has a lender doing a search seen both in this case?

fermi

A slightly odd explanation by the Experian Company rep.

--> http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64541816&postcount=64

kingstreet

TBH I haven't got that far.

I now have all three versions and I'm comparing and seeing if I can improve any of them before I start on lender selection.

The good news is it's all more than three years old and satisfied, so they issue will be loan to value and who will give the highest.

If the default is only visible once, Nationwide is probably the best bet, but (IIRC) its system doesn't allow you to re-try at lower LTVs if you get a decline at the desired higher level.

kingstreet

fermi wrote: »

A slightly odd explanation by the Experian Company rep.

--> http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64541816&postcount=64

I see what you mean! :eek:

fermi

Exactly!

In my head that says, they can't see it except when they can. They shouldn't see it for credit scoring, but may see anyway, and if they do we trust them to pretend they didn't!

Well I joke slightly there, but it's sounds almost that daft.

I can see how they want it to work and think it should. I'm just not sure I trust it to work that way in practice.