The Abuse of the Credit Rating System

James_B.

BikingBud wrote: »

As such it is a flawed system, they should be required to at least inform the individual before they raise the mark.

Why? They do not work for you, they work for their customers, who are the people that you may want to obtain credit from. It is they who have the contract with the agencies.

I think that a lot of the complaints boil down to "how dare a company have information about me on file". In general there is no legal reason why a company cannot, as long as they stick within the rules on data holding and maintenance. You have no general right to object to someone noting details about you.

Edited to add, we see this on another thread by the OP,

Hi Peeps,
Have an outstanding dept with Capital One (CO), no problem happy to pay but was unemployed, for some time last year and am on a temp contract now, which ends soon.
Have received a couple of letters one supposedly from CO, and another (conveniently about a week later ) from Lowell Portfollio (LP)

I despair at some of the posters on here, who will take no responsibility for their own actions, and then get upset when they quite rightly find their file records what they've done.

Cardew

James_B. wrote: »

I despair at some of the posters on here, who will take no responsibility for their own actions, and then get upset when they quite rightly find their file records what they've done.

Couldn't agree more with that statement. There are threads on here where advice for defaulting on genuine debts has been turned into an art form.

However surely that isn't the point of the OP's opening post. Whilst the majority of poor credit records might be justified it doesn't make this statement of the OP any less true.

What worries me is those that have a disagreement with a companies dealings with them (often because of bad admin which includes computer errors) are then hounded, harrassed, into paying by the threat of "Getting a BAD credit rating".
What amazes me more is that you now have to pay to LOOK at your credit rating!! So these people write stuff about you & you have to pay to see if its true. How did they get away with that?
Whatever is on there (rightly or wrongly) is considered gospel!

Perhaps the best examples can be found in the chaotic world of gas and electricity suppliers

On the gas and electricity forums there are frequent cases of problems with bills in shared houses - particularly students. Under the 'jointly and severally liable' provision any occupant can be held responsible for the total bill.

All it takes is a phone call to the Utility company from landlord or fellow student naming 'Student A' as responsible for gas/electricity payment - even without his knowledge - and he is in trouble.

Bills from before/after he lived in the house are in his name. Even if he paid his share to another occupant it is the same situation. They often don't even find out about the debt for a couple of years when they have been traced by a DCA.

In other cases tenants leaving a property contact the Utility company with meter readings and receive a final bill at their new address. Companies these days never send meter readers to take readings when someone is leaving. A year or two later they can receive a further bill as some new occupants have given different starting meter readings and the Utility Company have decided the discrepancy is the fault of the earlier occupants.

In both those examples credit records can be affected.

solentsusie

British Gas are one of the worst companies to deal with and apply defaults at the drop of a hat.

When I moved into my current property they tried to make me pay bills I kept receiving that were not mine and not in my name. I even found at a later date that they had applied a default to my file changing the name that was on the bills that weren't mine to mine!

I know this as I actually had an account with them in my own name that was running at the same time that they applied a fictitious account to my credit file and defaulted it. Why would I have two gas accounts for the same address running simultaneously? And one of them started before I had taken up residence.

These companies have a real responsibility to ensure the data reported is accurate and it is made simple for those with incorrect information reported on their file to get it removed and accurate information reported. I had a real nightmare of a time being treated like I was trying to get out of paying a debt that they had decided was mine when it wasn't. I do suspect people pay up through fear that they will not be able to get a credit card or more importantly a mortgage that they need in the future because of this. One tiny default can ruin someone's whole future.

BikingBud

James_B. wrote: »

I think that a lot of the complaints boil down to "how dare a company have information about me on file". In general there is no legal reason why a company cannot, as long as they stick within the rules on data holding and maintenance. You have no general right to object to someone noting details about you.

I despair at some of the posters on here, who will take no responsibility for their own actions, and then get upset when they quite rightly find their file records what they've done.

Well thank you very much for you uninformed thoughts or perhaps you can explain fully my situation rather than the general reason and general rights you pontificate about. How about the effect of the Data Protection Act and credit reference agencies the Information Commissioner seems to have an opinion?

So when I tell the service providers and 2 debt collection agencies that I have fed them the correct meter readings and if they submit the correct final bills, rather than estimated final bills, I will pay why should I be held to ransom? Perhaps the focus should be on the incompetence of the supplier rather than discrediting the honesty, integrity and solvency of the customer as both bills were below the actual consumption.

Your response in either general or specific terms will do?

Or an apology.

BikingBud

meer53 wrote: »

This is on their website :

http://www.britishgas.co.uk/help-and-advice/Bills-payments/Trouble-paying/Sharing-information-with-credit-reference-agencies.html

I had no trouble paying but refuse to pay a final bill based upon an estimated reading. How can it be final if it's an estimate? It's beyond all logic and the interminable incompetence of BG to address this ends up with me getting a mark.

Thrugelmir

BikingBud wrote: »

I had no trouble paying but refuse to pay a final bill based upon an estimated reading. How can it be final if it's an estimate? It's beyond all logic and the interminable incompetence of BG to address this ends up with me getting a mark.

You could have paid what you believed you owed. Takes two to tango.

usefulmale

Thrugelmir wrote: »

You could have paid what you believed you owed. Takes two to tango.

Yes, he could but they still would have lodged a default on what they consider outstanding, rather than try to sort the dispute out. Might as well be hung for a sheep than for a lamb.

meer53

usefulmale wrote: »

Yes, he could but they still would have lodged a default on what they consider outstanding, rather than try to sort the dispute out. Might as well be hung for a sheep than for a lamb.

Thats a silly way to look at things. BikingBud made no attempt to pay anything. No-one knows whether they would have applied the default for part payment but they would have had more bargaining power to get it removed than they do now !

James_B.

BikingBud wrote: »

Well thank you very much for you uninformed thoughts or perhaps you can explain fully my situation.

Your situation is that you FAILED to pay certain quantities on certain dates (your Capital One debt), and now find that others are less willing to lend to you. This is all as it should be. You were given a chance, you showed that you were not to be trusted, and now people are less likely to trust you.

You may think that it's no big thing to borrow money and not pay it back on time, and I've no interest in a moral debate over what I think of that, but the practicalities of it is that you will not find people as willing to lend.

As to an apology, you must be joking. You are utterly in the wrong here.

usefulmale

meer53 wrote: »

Thats a silly way to look at things. BikingBud made no attempt to pay anything. No-one knows whether they would have applied the default for part payment but they would have had more bargaining power to get it removed than they do now !

No, it's not. The companies that report to the CRA hold all the power. They can just issue a default that causes you disproportionate harm whether you are in the right or not and without reference to any other procedure or scutiny. You cannot have these removed if the debt is in dispute.

If a company feels that you owe the money, they should take you to court and have both sides views brought into the open for everyone to see and let a judge decide.

Should the judge decide for the company, and the debtor still doesn't pay, THEN issue a default.