Incorrect Credit Rating

Willsie01

EE put bad markers on my credit file and I was offered derisory compensation after I lodged a complaint, which ended up going through the Ombudsman.
The ridiculous thing is that these markers remain to this day well over a year after EE were made aware of their mistake.
In the words of the OS case investigator in an email to me: “Yes I agree that the entries on your credit file should be removed and that they were incorrectly put there.”

I’ve received the Ombudsman’s proposal, which I believe falls far short of what I consider adequate for the circumstances that I have experienced as a result of their mistake.
Incidentally, I only became aware right at the end of the lengthy process of going through the Ombudsman that when making their proposal they do not attempt to return the complainant to the position they would have been in if the incident hadn’t taken place. If I’d known that right from the start I wouldn’t have gone down that path.

I’m mindful of the forum Sticky that advises keeping posts to a minimum so I hope that I’ve done that above, but for anyone who has the patience I’ll add a brief description of the things that I believe deserve being compensated for in the order they occurred.
As an introduction to that I can say that the OS proposal is that EE pay me £400 as a “gesture of Goodwill”.

1. June 2015: Received a call and letter from a debt collection company first making me aware there was an issue, but I didn’t know or made aware of credit file action.
2. Soon after my suspicions were aroused after a letter of rejection of an application for an increase to the limit on a credit card. Letter referred to Equifax report. There was a reason for applying for the increase which couldn’t be fulfilled.
3. I had a commitment to give my car to my student son in August 2015 and planned to replace it with one on finance but was not in a position to apply for a loan.
This led to me having to use cash to buy an additional car, which impacted on other plans.
4. We are (were!) in the middle of renovating our house and reached the stage where we were going to obtain mortgage funds to complete the work but my financial advisor told me I had to get the credit file rectified before proceeding.
I’ve been in this position since before March. I have limited mortgage options anyway because of my age, but he had found me a good deal.

I do know that if I go to a Small Claims Court I will have to provide more than just my say so, so what prospects have I of a successful outcome and will it be worth it?
And given that EE demonstrably are not justified in putting the markers on the file am I not able to insist on them removing them immediately so I can get on with my plans?

cono1717

Something doesn't quite add up here. An Ombudsman or any dispute resolution service should put you back to where you would of been had the incident not occurred. I know for a fact that the Ombudsman Services do abide by this both from a previous experience and from people working there.

What I don't understand is how the debt got to the point of having a mark on the credit file - EE are usually pretty good with advising you of missed payment? Did you miss payments or have any action that caused this marker to appear?

In response to removing the marks the ombudsman should (if they believe it to be fair and just) put as part of their resolution for EE to remove the marks and you should be able to take a copy of this resolution to Equifax for them to have a record as well.

Willsie01

(Removed duplicate post)

bris

You need to prove actual financial losses in the small claims court. Not having funds available to make over a house is not a financial loss, neither is not being able to take out finance on a new car.


As the ombudsman has already ruled on this then although you can still go to the small claims court if you can prove losses beyond the £400 goodwill, the courts would most likely rule in their favour as they wouldn't actually know what you are claiming for.

[Deleted User]

What exactly was EE's "mistake"? Did they mistakenly think you had defaulted on a debt?
Why was a debt collection agency involved?

Why have you also duplicated your earlier thread (posted just a few hours ago)?
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71164796#Comment_71164796

Willsie01

Duplicate threads? Apologies. Not intended.
Your reply? Arguably not keeping posts to a minimum also.
As is this response.

[Deleted User]

Willsie01 wrote: »

Arguably not keeping posts to a minimum also.

Nowhere does it say keep posts to a minimum. What it says is that posts should be concise and to the point.
A bit like this one

Willsie01

cono1717 wrote: »

Something doesn't quite add up here. An Ombudsman or any dispute resolution service should put you back to where you would of been had the incident not occurred. I know for a fact that the Ombudsman Services do abide by this both from a previous experience and from people working there.

What I don't understand is how the debt got to the point of having a mark on the credit file - EE are usually pretty good with advising you of missed payment? Did you miss payments or have any action that caused this marker to appear?

In response to removing the marks the ombudsman should (if they believe it to be fair and just) put as part of their resolution for EE to remove the marks and you should be able to take a copy of this resolution to Equifax for them to have a record as well.

Thanks for your response.
Point 1 "An Ombudsman or any dispute resolution service should put you back to where you would of been had the incident not occurred" directly contradicts what the case investigator told me during a teleconference review prior to her finalising the proposal. If anyone can point out information that bears out what you say it would be very useful to me.

2. I didn't miss any payments. I had cancelled a contract and somehow EE acted as if I hadn't, although subsequently acknowledging I had, but still have left the bad markers! I think that EE have been very poor in everything to do with my account since I closed it so I have no idea as to why it got to the stage it did where the first I became aware of it was a call from a debt collection company. The fact that the bad markers still exist to this day despite them being made aware many months ago of the position shows that they haven't been "pretty good" with the issue in this case. The case officer thinks it's a case of their method of correcting the credit file failing.

Point 3. The Ombudsman proposal does task EE with removing the bad markers, but unfortunately they are only obliged to implement this if both of us accept the proposal and even then they have 28 days to carry it out.

Willsie01

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

What exactly was EE's "mistake"? Did they mistakenly think you had defaulted on a debt?
Why was a debt collection agency involved?

Why have you also duplicated your earlier thread (posted just a few hours ago)?

I had cancelled a rolling monthly contract, but somehow this wasn't implemented correctly by whoever it is within their business should have been doing it. Basically, I don't know what went on within EE all I know is that I first heard about it when I received the call from the debt collection agency.

Duplicated thread: yes, sorry. Not sure don't know how that happened and I've already been chastised for it:( Is there any way I can delete it? I'm a newbie in this forum and I can't see how to.

Willsie01

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Nowhere does it say keep posts to a minimum. What it says is that posts should be concise and to the point.
A bit like this one

Yes, but both the conciseness and the number of (frivolous) posts have a bearing on adding to the overhead of the forum. :silenced:

Willsie01

bris wrote: »

You need to prove actual financial losses in the small claims court. Not having funds available to make over a house is not a financial loss, neither is not being able to take out finance on a new car.


As the ombudsman has already ruled on this then although you can still go to the small claims court if you can prove losses beyond the £400 goodwill, the courts would most likely rule in their favour as they wouldn't actually know what you are claiming for.

Thanks for your reply.
I only went down the Ombudsman route after speaking to Which? Legal Service.
Since I’ve received the proposal I have been in touch with them again pointing out I am not satisfied with the proposal and asking about the Small Claims Court route. An extract from an email they sent me pertaining to using the Court is as follows:

“Recent court cases indicate that you can make a claim for distress and inconvenience even if you are not claiming for financial loss. As far as your financial losses are concerned you would have to show that you suffered the loss as a result of the inaccurate entry on your credit record and be able to substantiate the sum you are claiming. The standard of proof for your claim is the balance of probabilities (i.e. more likely than not).”

I believe I can easily demonstrate inconvenience and a little distress.
I have also suffered a financial loss but accept that is not so easy to prove.