Credit card default 8 years after

teleop

Hi all, hope someone can help me out on this one. I had a credit card with Monument couldn't keep up payments so I entered a DMP IN 2006. This was then sold onto Arrow / Global . Just recently I have been checking my credit file on Noddle and it shows that Arrow have put a default on on Jan 2014. Can they do that I am in an arranged payment with DMP, also I cant understand why MONUMENT didn't put a default on it years ago. It seems so unfair as this will not come off till 2020. Can I ask MONUMENT to backdate it . I have rang MONUMENT asking why they didn't put this on earlier when they had the debt , all they would say was to put it in writing. Rang Arrow they said the reason they have defaulted is because they were not getting contractural payments and it was in arrears. Don't understand this at all it is so confusing. Was hoping to get my credit back to some kind of normality. No chance now . I am upto date with payments to Arrow none been missed at all.

Medihv

Hey Teleop,

I can't offer you much advice here and i hope that someone comes along soon to be off more assistance and it sounds like its a bit of a mix up

teleop wrote: »

Was hoping to get my credit back to some kind of normality. No chance now

The only advice i can offer is that this situation can be sorted out. A friend came back from the states with 7 missed payments on a mobile contract £1100 in arrears with his credit rating in tatters. He even missed a court date. Anyway, after many phone calls and letters he was able to resolve the situation and his credit rating is now back to normal!

I believe that if you are able to put this situation into writing and clearly explain the confusion you should be able to start making payments and get this removed from your history

teleop

Thanks Medihv, hope some advice as well.:j

Westminster

I was able to get several defaults backdated successfully - if you still need some assistance then I can tell you more about what I did and provide copies of the letters etc that I used.

Mrs_Hutchins

Hi Westminister.

Are you able to provide those letters etc?

Barclaycard have put defaults on my credit report dated 2013 but I started to default in 2008 when I originally went on a DMP.
Can I challenge this?

Many thanks - Mrs_Hutchins

fermi

Would be useful to see.

Westminster

Any challenge will come down to the finer details of the account and how it has been managed, what your payment levels where in relation to the minimum payment etc etc.

However, the unfortunate issue is that nobody is going to force BC to change this so it comes down to how they view your case.

I should also add - that I had no issue with my BC default date, I was able to get Cahoot (now Santander), Cabot (a Goldfish card - subsequently bought out by Barclaycard though I believe), Co-Op and BoS all to backdate to varying degrees. The wording of those various letters differed based on the specifics of what occurred but I have pasted below one example to give you the 'gist' of it.

Dear Sirs,

I have an account with you with the above reference which is currently being administered by Cabot (their ref also listed). I originally wrote to them regarding the matter below and they advised me to contact you directly.

I recently picked up my credit file and noticed quite an anomaly on the default date which is listed as 07/06/2007.

The account has been under the same Debt Management Plan with PayPlan since October 2006 and my query is why there is such a discrepancy between the default date and when contractual payments ended.

There are a number of points in the Information Commissioner’s Office technical guidelines on issuing defaults which I feel are relevant when considering whether the default date should be modified with the credit reference agencies:
• Information placed on a credit reference file should meet consistent standards and, therefore, that defaults should be filed in similar circumstances to each other.
• The term ‘default’, when recorded on a credit reference file should be used to refer to a situation when “the lender in a standard business relationship with the individual decides the relationship has broken down”
• There should be a maximum period after which, if anything is to be recorded with a credit reference agency, a default must be filed.
• Lenders should not file a default where there is a genuine and agreed variation in the payment schedule. (The only exception to this is where a debt management programme is put in place where the level of repayment represents only a token sum which is only accepted by the lender because the customer cannot afford to pay more.)
• A debt management programme (DMP) is when a customer enters a programme of repayment of all or a number of their credit agreements that has been negotiated by a third party, ‘not for profit’, debt adviser. By entering the programme the customer shows that he is acting more responsibly than someone who makes no effort whatsoever to pay what is due. However, in financial terms, DMPs include markedly different situations. Repayments vary from a level acceptable to a lender to those where the sums repaid are only nominal amounts which a socially responsible lender agrees to accept because it recognises that in entering a debt management programme the customer is trying to act responsibly but cannot afford to pay more, and this is the only way to recoup any of the debt.3 Consequently the record filed on a credit reference file should discriminate between these situations so that an adequate reflection of the financial standing of these customers can be shared with other lenders.
• If the payment set out in the DMP is at a level that represents only a token sum in repayment, because that is all the customer can afford, the account should be recorded as a default.

As it stands – I am significantly disadvantaged by your delaying the default on my file as it will remain there for 6 years from the listed default date. This effectively means I am in a worse position than bankruptcy or failing to make 6 payments in a row (thereby presumably forcing your hand in a default). Having entered the DMP in October 2006 I could reasonably expect a record on my file of this account to be removed around October 2012 but this account will remain on my file for a further 4 years.

The majority of my creditors issued defaults in 2006. I trust that these representations are sufficient for your consideration to revise my default date back to 2006.

If you decide that you do not want to do this then I require some information from you so I can take up a complaint with the ICO regarding your treatment of my data.
• Can you confirm the date I first defaulted on the contracted payments?
• Please provide your company guidelines policy on the issuance of defaults on delinquent accounts.

I look forward to hearing from you shortly either way.

One last thing - I sent most of my letters in 2012 and the ICO guidance was changed in Jan 2014

fermi

Westminster wrote: »

Any challenge will come down to the finer details of the account and how it has been managed, what your payment levels where in relation to the minimum payment etc etc.

However, the unfortunate issue is that nobody is going to force BC to change this so it comes down to how they view your case.

I have seen some FOS adjudications and final decisions where they did come down on the side of the comsumer on these, so that's not 100% always the case.

Most time the FOS are a bit clueless though.

I'll see if I can dig them out or find them again, as although you can't cite them in any binding way, they could be useful.

teleop

Hi Westminster, that would be great if you could give me any help would appreciate. How many defaults did you manage to get backdated. We're you in similar position to myself. Could you also forward letter you used if possible. Thanks in advance.��

Westminster

Unfortunately I only got to see my own FOS response (despite spending plenty of time in the run up to my complaint searching the database of past decisions).

Here is what they said as their final response to mine:

I write further to my email of 16 May 2014. I have carefully considered the additional points you have raised however, I have to explain that my view of your complaint has not changed.

Having received your email dated 13 May 2014, I contacted MBNA to ask why no reference had been made to the policy of only accepting formal repayment plans when the debt can be cleared within five years.

In response MBNA explained that in November 2006, when it agreed your repayment plan, its policy was to consider arranging formal repayment plans when the outstanding balance could be repaid over a ten year period.

Having reviewed MBNA’s internal records I can see that the outstanding balance of your account in November 2006 was £6,559.11. The monthly repayments under your repayment plan were £53.05, meaning that the full outstanding balance would have been repaid in 10 years and four months. While this period was slightly greater than MBNA’s 10 year requirement, I feel that agreeing the plan was a reasonable concession to have made in order to assist you at that time.

I also asked MBNA why arrears did not continue to accrue when reduced repayments were being made. In response MBNA provided a letter it sent to you on 22 November 2006, which confirmed the repayment plan that had been agreed (copy attached). This letter explained that if your first three payments of the agreed amount were received on time, it would consider removing the arrears from the account. MBNA has confirmed that the arrears were cleared on 19 January 2007 following receipt of the agreed payments.

Having reviewed this letter I can also see it explained at that time, that your reduced monthly repayments would be shown on your credit file for up to six years after the balance had been settled in full. This persuades me that you were aware of the consequences of the agreement when it was made.

I understand that in your current circumstances you feel that you would have been better off had your account defaulted in 2006. However, having considered the information available to MBNA at that time, I am satisfied that its decision to agree a reduced repayment plan and prevent the account from defaulting was a genuine attempt to assist you.

This means that I do not consider that your complaint should be upheld. I know that this is not the outcome you were hoping for and I appreciate that this will come as a disappointment to you.

If you disagree with this, please write and tell me by 27 June 2014 – setting out your reasons and including any evidence that you have not already provided and that you think is important to your case. I would be grateful if you could let me know now, if you plan to reply fully but do not think you will be able to meet this deadline.

As we explain in our leaflet, your complaint and the ombudsman, consumers have the right to ask an ombudsman to review their case – as the final stage of our process. But if we do not hear from you by 27 June 2014, we will assume that you have decided not to pursue the complaint further.

fermi

That is the most typical type of response, yes.