Amex never forgets... an experiment.

Mr_Goodkat

GingerBob wrote: »

So you think the 60 year old should be penalised for an indiscretion when he was 18?

OP, I would check with the ICO. Lifetime anythings are intrinsically unfair; people change. Just sound them out about this particular scenario.

Yes I do!!


If YOU have not paid back what you owe THEM why should THEY give YOU more money to spend?


The mind boggles with some people it really does

GingerBob_3

Mr_Goodkat wrote: »

The mind boggles with some people it really does

Yes, it certainly does. By the way, what's it like to have led a perfect life?

callum9999

GingerBob wrote: »

Yes, it certainly does. By the way, what's it like to have led a perfect life?

There is a distinct difference between being "perfect" and making mistakes and accepting the consequences.

A bank refusing to lend money to someone who lost them money in the past by defaulting is common sense, not some form of unwarranted punishment.

Quite frankly, if you lend money to a stranger who then refuses to pay it back, then after a while you lend them more money ("charity" aside), you're an idiot.

GingerBob_3

callum9999 wrote: »

There is a distinct difference between being "perfect" and making mistakes and accepting the consequences.

I would only say that anyone who thinks misdemeanours of an 18 year old should be held against him when he's 60, must think himself perfect. That was my example. I make no comment on the case of the OP (seven years), but merely suggest he contacts the ICO to see what they think about it.

Mr_Goodkat

GingerBob wrote: »

Yes, it certainly does. By the way, what's it like to have led a perfect life?

Have not led a perfect life by any stretch of the imagination I have made mistakes financially, professionally and personally but I have tried to learn from them all and probably have learnt as much from my mistakes as I have from my successes.


I have been debt and a lot of it but I worked by backside off to get out of, did everything I could to both earn more money and cut back spending. I made sure I paid every penny back and have built up substantial savings and investments.


Banks etc have every right to not offer new credit facilities to someone who did not pay back what they owe and life time blacklisting is not a bad thing.


Why should someone who has not paid back what they owed be offered credit again by the same institution just because of period of time has passed?

Mr_Goodkat

GingerBob wrote: »

I would only say that anyone who thinks misdemeanours of an 18 year old should be held against him when he's 60, must think himself perfect. That was my example. I make no comment on the case of the OP (seven years), but merely suggest he contacts the ICO to see what they think about it.

But if I owed American Express £5000 at 18 and by the age of 60 had not paid it back as I had gone down the IVA/Bankruptcy route why should American Express lend me money again at 60 just because 42 years has gone by?

giblet10

Mr_Goodkat wrote: »

But if I owed American Express £5000 at 18 and by the age of 60 had not paid it back as I had gone down the IVA/Bankruptcy route why should American Express lend me money again at 60 just because 42 years has gone by?

Well I guess the 18 years olds attitude to money, amongst other things, could have changed/matured.

I mean I used to be fairly liberal but now very right wing..I've simply changed as I've got older.

Look at me, like the OP, I got into hot water with Amex in my early 20's. I really miss my Amex card. I wish they had declined me back then for a card so I could get one now as I am now married, with a house, have held cards for years now and not once even thought about getting into hot water again.

giblet10

...but I do agree..any bank should have the right to say no if it doesn't want to lend. The bank ultimately has to be happy it will make good money before lending it.

GingerFurball_2

GingerBob wrote: »

So you think the 60 year old should be penalised for an indiscretion when he was 18?

If the lender doesn't want to lend to you then I don't see why not?

It's harsh, but Amex (or whoever the company is) is perfectly entitled to take that stance.

PaulW922

The ICO would probably find this practice acceptable as long as the data being retained was reasonable. If it were for example just a record to be able to identify you should you reapply that would probably be ok. If they kept lots of other irrelevant personal data that may be different. Nobody has a right to a card after all!