Thought CRAs are only 6 years? Possible Barclaycard blacklist?

chattychappy

meer53 wrote: »

Banks don't have to provide a reason for refusing to lend to you. Even if you've never borrowed from them before.

Most of signed up to the Lending Code which at para 56 states:

If a lending application is declined following credit assessment, the subscriber should explain the main reason why if asked by the customer. If the decline is as a result of information obtained from a CRA search, the subscriber should provide the customer with contact details for the CRA.

I believe this reflects the position under the DPA.

Obviously it only refers to "the main reason". The bank doesn't have to go into detail as to its lending criteria.

michaels

If I had lent you money 10 years ago which you hadn't repaid and I knew you now had a decent income and rather than trying to pay me back you came knocking for another loan I know where i would tell you to go

Thrugelmir

JKSandy wrote: »

As per ICO no company should hold information longer than deemed necessary.

All the lender holds is a list of customers that have previously defaulted on them. This list can be maintained for as long as the lender wishes. As infringes no data protection laws.

Same will apply to any business. No obligation to do business with anyone.

reclusive46

matttye wrote: »

Global blacklisting is a myth, but companies can blacklist you using the data they hold about you if they want.

Barclaycard is obviously taking a once bitten, twice shy approach.

American Express is infamous for permanently blacklisting people who default with them as well.

JKSandy

Thrugelmir wrote: »

All the lender holds is a list of customers that have previously defaulted on them. This list can be maintained for as long as the lender wishes. As infringes no data protection laws.

Same will apply to any business. No obligation to do business with anyone.

Am I right in saying if Barclays did give the OP a new card they could transfer the debt owed to his new card?

meer53

chattychappy wrote: »

Most of signed up to the Lending Code which at para 56 states:

If a lending application is declined following credit assessment, the subscriber should explain the main reason why if asked by the customer. If the decline is as a result of information obtained from a CRA search, the subscriber should provide the customer with contact details for the CRA.

I believe this reflects the position under the DPA.

Obviously it only refers to "the main reason". The bank doesn't have to go into detail as to its lending criteria.

Standard phrase is usually, "you've been declined due to adverse information seen on your credit file, please contact the CRA's for more information."

What information has been seen isn't usually given.

chattychappy

meer53 wrote: »

Standard phrase is usually, "you've been declined due to adverse information seen on your credit file, please contact the CRA's for more information."

What information has been seen isn't usually given.

True, if indeed it was CRA information. But it might be another reason - eg not meeting lending criteria based on the information on the application. In this case the CC doesn't have to say unless asked (I think they usually do). Also the applicant is entitled to have an application reconsidered manually in the case of an automated decision. But the human doesn't have to depart from the same decision making process that the computer system used - and therefore come up with the same result.

bengal-stripe

meer53 wrote: »

Standard phrase is usually, "you've been declined due to adverse information seen on your credit file, please contact the CRA's for more information."

In the OP's case, the bank was very clear and unequivocal:

Loki1000 wrote: »

I was not accepted because of "breaking T&Cs from a previously held account due to leaving a outstanding balance" or words to pretty that effect......

meer53

bengal-stripe wrote: »

In the OP's case, the bank was very clear and unequivocal:

I agree, but they were obviously referring to information the bank held, not what was on the credit file. Hence the OP assuming there is some sort of "blacklist", they have successfully obtained credit since then.

I was referring to declines due to credit file information and the fact that this information isn't usually given.

If i'm declining lending for someone and it's due to what i can see (apart from credit file info), i always give the reasons. Unless it falls under AML regulations.

Loki1000

Hi again folks,

Thanks for all the replies, most have been educational although a few clearly did not read my full opening post.

Anyway...I know BC have every right to refuse me, with or without a reason. Fully aware of how credit works.
And yes, I could pay back the amount owed if I wanted, approx £1500. But I will not and don't want to. My reasons are this, I was young and silly, I ran up a silly debt when banks were **not** doing doing proper checks on my credit worthiness. If I paid it back now it would serve no purpose other than to clear any guilty conscious I had (which I don't) from non-payment. You can argue about morals all you want, I get it, we will simply have to agree to disagree. Me paying £1500 would be money down the drain, I would be no better off financially or credit wise (clearly outwith Barclays).

My initial post was to give a full and frank background before my question, can banks keep records beyond 6 years? I did not know.

I don't need a BC really, I was just looking to take advantage of a potential BT I might require within the next 2 months. I know I can get credit elsewhere without issue, I have excellent cards with superb cash back rates/no foreign fees/lifetime low rates such as a RBS at 6.9% and MBNA at 6.4%. My credit rating is I would say, nearly as good as it gets for most folk.

Clearly I stung the wrong bank in Barclaycard however and they will refuse to allow me a product again. I'm absolutely fine with that, I just wanted to educated if that was allowed after 6 years and some of you seem to have got yourself a high horse and think a lecture is what I required. Not really necessary. I know I'm a good customer now and most certainly good for the money to be paid back, sorry for not being the perfect human being and growing up making no mistakes like several angels on here...(sarcasm btw, I know it fails some). I know the score now so thanks for the helpful replies I can honestly say I am now a little bit more wiser from your wisdom.

Thanks all!