Duplicate entries

khaleesi

Hi recently my partner has had a company buy an old debt and issue court papers.

So of course we were using credit reports to try validate the details as they did not give any details apart from an amount on the claim.

My problem is this is an old debt with Provident and yet on his credit file he has a debt with provident for one amount and a debt from the collectors 2k over the original amount but with the exact same dates?


Is this even right?

Both have been updated in February.

We are challenging them via courts as we fail to understand what this is from and when as the dates and amounts do not add up.

I just want to know is it right to duplicate and add 2k onto an amount even legal and what steps we take to get this sorted if it is not right?

fermi

From the ICO on this.

CRA Defaults - Recording of defaults relating to debts that have been sold.

The practice of selling/buying debts is widely used. As long as the information is correctly recorded on a credit file by the lender selling the debt and the lender buying the debt, then two entries relating to one account would not be considered to be a breach of the Data Protection Act provided that:-

• both recorded entries are shown as being in relation to the same account/debt;
• the original debt entry should be shown on the credit file as being either ‘settled' or ‘zero' balance and should show that the debt has been ‘re-assigned’;
• the new DC who shows the debt in their name should maintain the original default date and the correct balances;
• the retention period for maintaining the information on a credit file should be based on the original default date regardless of who is responsible for the entry/debt.

khaleesi

Thanks for the reply.

I tried to dispute this on my credit file and had a letter saying lowell refused to remove it as it is from a provident debt so I have emailed Noddle who I raised the dispute with and highlighted the fact it has the same dates as the provident debt and yet both are showing as active showing I have 2 debts not one and also that the amounts are £2,100 in difference to each other. And also stated the same higher debt shows on my partners credit file despite them not being joint loans at all just because we are connected by address we had the loans in separate names at separate times.

fermi

If the original entry is not showing clearly that it is a sold on debt and not a duplicate, then you need to complain about that to the original creditor citing the ICO requirement on how it should me marked.

Tell them that unless they amend it, you will be taking your complaint on to the FOS and ICO.

Dispute the balance with Lowells one, though may have had legitimate charges/interest applied since the provident default.

Again, tell them that is they can't justify it them you will be taking your complaint on to the FOS and ICO

khaleesi

Thank you for your advice.

I am rubbish at writing letters and could not find a template for this but I had a go hoping it gets the point across

Dear Sir/ Madam,
It has recently come to my attention that a debt in which you have sold on to Lowell group is still showing as default on my credit account for yourselves as well as showing as a duplicate account with Lowell.
I therefore request that you amend my credit account accordingly as set out with the ICO requirements of sold on debts as stated here:
CRA Defaults - Recording of defaults relating to debts that have been sold.
The practice of selling/buying debts is widely used. As long as the information is correctly recorded on a credit file by the lender selling the debt and the lender buying the debt, then two entries relating to one account would not be considered to be a breach of the Data Protection Act provided that:-both recorded entries are shown as being in relation to the same account/debt; the original debt entry should be shown on the credit file as being either ‘settled' or ‘zero' balance and should show that the debt has been ‘re-assigned’; the new DC who shows the debt in their name should maintain the original default date and the correct balances; the retention period for maintaining the information on a credit file should be based on the original default date regardless of who is responsible for the entry/debt.
If my request is not amended within a timely manner I will be taking this further by contacting the FOS and ICO in accordance with the ICO requirements.

I expect a reply to my letter in a timely manner.


Hoping that works. I am also sending a similar letter the opposite way to lowell asking why the debt is showing £2100 more than the original debt considering that they only took it on in November last year. Seems a steep climb and asking for all proof of this debt. Hope I am allowed to do this?

khaleesi

I made a mistake on the years.