Barclaycard Refusal:

tomxlisa

I've just had someone call me from barclaycard to let me know the specific reason why my credit card application was declined, it was due to a past account with them which I had and defaulted on about 10 years ago, so it seems even if the default has dropped off your files with a company you can still get declined by them, this maybe isn't the case for capital one as I defaulted with them probably about the same years ago and got an account with them no problems, maybe some card company's keep information on file for life and some don't.

MABLE

tomxlisa wrote: »

I've just had someone call me from barclaycard to let me know the specific reason why my credit card application was declined, it was due to a past account with them which I had and defaulted on about 10 years ago, so it seems even if the default has dropped off your files with a company you can still get declined by them, this maybe isn't the case for capital one as I defaulted with them probably about the same years ago and got an account with them no problems, maybe some card company's keep information on file for life and some don't.

A friend of mine was taken to court by Barclaycard in 1983 and 15 years later applied and was accepted for a Barclaycard.

tomxlisa

Strange, she definitely said it was because of an old account which is still on records, I told her it's not on my credit files anymore as I've checked, but I've obviously still been rejected as it is showing up their end, she is gonna try and appeal it for me with the underwriters but not sure why she is bothering, I told her not to but she said it was worth the try.

shortcrust

tomxlisa wrote: »

Strange, she definitely said it was because of an old account which is still on records, I told her it's not on my credit files anymore as I've checked, but I've obviously still been rejected as it is showing up their end, she is gonna try and appeal it for me with the underwriters but not sure why she is bothering, I told her not to but she said it was worth the try.

That seems really odd to me.

MABLE wrote: »

A friend of mine was taken to court by Barclaycard in 1983 and 15 years later applied and was accepted for a Barclaycard.

In terms of the scope and scale of data storage and analysis they're different eras. When I started work doing data analysis for the civil service in 1996, 1983 was effectively prehistoric. If you wanted information from that far back it would probably have to be ordered and would arrive a week later as reams of paper! These days it's easy peasy get data from 10 years ago.

tomtontom

Did you ever settle the default?

You can understand why they might not want your business ...

andyfromotley

The only real issue here is how long the companies are retaining the information about you. Its an area that is regulated by the information commissioner.

A company cant just choose to keep old records about you because they fancy it. It has to meet a number of criteria, such as to be relevant, up to date, accurate etc.

I ddint work in finance but in another field where we held highly personal information about individuals. VERY little was allowed to retained for longer than 7 years. The ICO will no doubt have issued guidelines about this specific area, a quick google should turn up the relevant guidance.

Nowadays most large companies are very switched on to this area and compliant, as huge penalties if you are not. In the first few years of the ICO it was all a bit shambolic.

shortcrust

andyfromotley wrote: »

The only real issue here is how long the companies are retaining the information about you. Its an area that is regulated by the information commissioner.

A company cant just choose to keep old records about you because they fancy it. It has to meet a number of criteria, such as to be relevant, up to date, accurate etc.

I ddint work in finance but in another field where we held highly personal information about individuals. VERY little was allowed to retained for longer than 7 years. The ICO will no doubt have issued guidelines about this specific area, a quick google should turn up the relevant guidance.

Nowadays most large companies are very switched on to this area and compliant, as huge penalties if you are not. In the first few years of the ICO it was all a bit shambolic.

I imagine they can keep records indefinitely if money's still owed. After all, debts don't cease to exist when they become statute barred and drop off credit reports.

I can't see anything in the guidelines around retention of data that says companies shouldn't keep records of people who've defaulted. The data protection act says "Personal data processed for any purpose or purposes shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose or those purposes." Keeping information that helps to ensure you don't lend to people who've previously broken a contract with you seems like a perfectly reasonable purpose to me. I can't see what basis there would be for time limit in this instance.

Just my take from a quick look at the ICO website. I'm happy to be educated!:)

jonesMUFCforever

If the OP still owed money before it was closed off I would suggest the information is necessary.

andyfromotley

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

If the OP still owed money before it was closed off I would suggest the information is necessary.

Yup no disagreement there, however they definitely will not be allowed to keep that information for ever. I don't know what the ICO stipulates for this (and cant be bothered to check to be honest!) There will be a time limit on it that's all i'm saying.

adindas

andyfromotley wrote: »

Yup no disagreement there, however they definitely will not be allowed to keep that information for ever.

Where did you get this information from ??????????????????????????????

YorkshireBoy

andyfromotley wrote: »

Yup no disagreement there, however they definitely will not be allowed to keep that information for ever. I don't know what the ICO stipulates for this (and cant be bothered to check to be honest!) There will be a time limit on it that's all i'm saying.

FD keep data "for ever", in that if you've ever had an account (any account!) with them you can't get a current account switching incentive.

And they've been around for 25 years or so!

I must admit though, that if I'd lent money to someone and they hadn't paid me back (or caused me grief and expense to get it back), they'd never "ever" get another penny. Why should an institution treat such non-payment any differently?...is what they'd argue to the FOS/ICO or whatever I'd imagine.