So glad I signed up with Equifax! Tougher laws needed?

Kentboys

A few years ago my Dad wanted to open another bank account and couldnt. Long story short, someone had wracked up £1500 with Littlewoods, goods delivered to a linked address he knew nothing of, and he had a CCJ in another part of the country he wasn't aware of for 5 years.

I signed up with Equifax straight away.

I've just got an alert that Shopdirect (eg Littlewoods/ Very) had done a search on me. Rung them up and low and behold, £500 worth of goods ordered in my name.

Thankfully, was able to alert them before the goods had been dispatched but just wanted to share as a warning to all, tha this same scam has now happened to me and another member of my family at opposite ends of the country.

Was frankly astounded that anyone can sign up if they know your name, address and date of birth, and could even potentially deliver to a different address.
Is this fraud as widespread as it seems? If yes, why isn't the government introducing tougher laws so that proof of Id/ address is needed to take out credit with mail order companies?

If its this easy to create a credit account and order goods to a third party address, would warn everyone to sign up with a credit agency.

Am still fuming :mad: and thinking about writing to a newspaper to highlight the issue and warn others but may wait til Im a bit calmer!

wealdroam

Kentboys wrote: »

Is this fraud as widespread as it seems? If yes, why isn't the government introducing tougher laws so that proof of Id/ address is needed to take out credit with mail order companies?

The victim of the fraud is Shop Direct.

Perhaps you should be asking why Shop Direct allow new customers to set up accounts without proper checks.

Kentboys

The victim in law is Shopdirect, but it seems too often the victim is also the person who may innocently have debts taken out in their name, have bailiffs knocking for goods they did not order and CCJs they knew nothing about.

Per above, needs to be some serious thought given as to why (online)catalogue companies can let fraudsters order goods on credit with little to no checks

shaun_from_Africa

A lot of the time, too many checks may result in them losing potential customers and I would be amazed if they haven't spent a good deal of time and money on working out if by having few checks on new customers, any losses from fraud are cancelled out by far greater profits from genuine customers.

After all, if they were losing more than they were gaining then they would have changed their vetting process but they obviously consider that how they are currently operating is working for them.

JReacher1

The order will probably never have been despatched. A high credit first order sent to a third party address would almost certainly be held by littlewoods credit referral team. I doubt they would have passed it.

SnowTiger

Kentboys wrote: »

A few years ago my Dad wanted to open another bank account and couldnt. Long story short, someone had wracked up £1500 with Littlewoods, goods delivered to a linked address he knew nothing of, and he had a CCJ in another part of the country he wasn't aware of for 5 years.

Perhaps you should really be asking why Equifax incorrectly linked an address to you Father.

I know you've written in praise of Equifax, however it's their failing that associated your Father with someone elses debt.

shaun_from_Africa

SnowTiger wrote: »

Perhaps you should really be asking why Equifax incorrectly linked an address to you Father.

I know you've written in praise of Equifax, however it's their failing that associated your Father with someone elses debt.

The OP has praised Equifax because they were allerted about someone applying for a credit account in their name and this recent ncident was nothing to do with their father.

jjj1980

SnowTiger wrote: »

Perhaps you should really be asking why Equifax incorrectly linked an address to you Father.

I know you've written in praise of Equifax, however it's their failing that associated your Father with someone elses debt.

Equifax hadn't linked an incorrect address, only report the information provided to them.

It sounds as though the mail order company will have had an application with a very low time at current address, low enough that it would be expected to not find any records at the address and the op's father's address given as previous address. This automatically creates a link between between the addresses. As the father will have been on voters roll etc at the previous address, the application is underwritten based on that address. Most likely accepted immediately. I've worked in high-value loan underwriting and been surprised by how many loans were immediate accept.

Paulmy51

Just felt the need to comment on this thread.

It's all well and good pointing out that the injured party in law is the catalogue company but when this happened to my wife in relation to an old house it almost cost us a property we were buying due to the time we spent in cleaning up the issues caused by the fradulent purchase if items in my wife's name.

The really annoying element is that the individual concerned was not prosecuted for that matter as the companies involved did not want to press charges (I'd guess because they don't want the general population to realise how easy it is to commit these types of fraud).

That said, the individual concerned did end up having a conversation with her local council about a fraudulent hosubg benefit claim which came to light at the same time.

SnowTiger

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

The OP has praised Equifax because they were allerted about someone applying for a credit account in their name and this recent ncident was nothing to do with their father.

I get that. But it's the reason they signed for Equifax alerts, presumably paying a fee.

I wouldn't be happy to pay a company every month to ensure they don't gather and store incorrect information about me.