Noddle fails

50Twuncle

I am using Noddle on a free 12 month basis - linked to TalkTalks behaviour last year...
Someone has just opened a "BANK OF SCOTLAND" current account - using all of my details
Yet Noddle has failed to even notice this fact - it is not even mentioned on my Noddle account
Luckily the person who opened the account is known to me - it is ME - But what if it hadn't been me ?

Candyapple

1. Noddle is free for life

2. It can take up to 3 months for some companies to register your accounts with a credit reference agency

3. Noddle are the smallest CRA out of the 3 and a lot of companies don't report to them so you would need to subscribe to the other 2 to get the complete picture

4. If you want alerts anytime someone applies for credit in your name you need to pay £20 for a protective registration with CIFAS: https://www.cifas.org.uk/protective_registration_form

pappa_golf

the talk talk offer was a sham , as you have found out only a few companies subscribe to noddle , those who don,t are not shown,


the ironic thing is that talk talk , who gave you this "freebie" because they were hacked , don't even report to noddle themselves!

50Twuncle

pappa_golf wrote: »

the talk talk offer was a sham , as you have found out only a few companies subscribe to noddle , those who don,t are not shown,
the ironic thing is that talk talk , who gave you this "freebie" because they were hacked , don't even report to noddle themselves!

Will Experian prove any better ?
Because, if not - what is the point of any of these agencies ?
I thought that they were supposed to alert us to anything that may affect our rating - and if someone had opened a bank account fraudulently - that would have affected my rating ?

Marktheshark

The Bank are the victim of this fraud, however they will gladly let you adopt their mistake.

pappa_golf

50Twuncle wrote: »

Will Experian prove any better ?
Because, if not - what is the point of any of these agencies ?
I thought that they were supposed to alert us to anything that may affect our rating - and if someone had opened a bank account fraudulently - that would have affected my rating ?

Will Experian prove any better ?

only if the new account (company) uses them


why clutter things up with 3 CRA s , there should just be one , that everybody subscribes too

50Twuncle

Here's Noddles response to my query..


Thanks for your email. Your Noddle credit report is not updated instantly to reflect changes that have been made and instead refreshes every 30 days. Any changes that take place in the interim period are displayed in your new report.

Many changes are dependent on us receiving an update from your lenders, which happens every 4-6 weeks. This, coupled with the 30 day refresh period, means that changes can take up to 10 weeks to be reflected in your Noddle report.

If you’ve recently opened the accounts we may not yet have received any information on it yet – it can take 6-8 weeks before new account information filters through to us.

It’s worth noting that, even if your Noddle report hasn’t been refreshed, the main database will be updated as soon as we’re made aware of any changes. Therefore, if any searches are made on your file, lenders will see the most up to date information we have.

If this information hasn’t been updated after 10 weeks have passed, please raise a dispute against the account by clicking the ‘Dispute’ button underneath it so we can look into this for you.

Doesn't fill me with confidence !!!

GingerBob_3

50Twuncle wrote: »

Will Experian prove any better ?
Because, if not - what is the point of any of these agencies ?
I thought that they were supposed to alert us to anything that may affect our rating - and if someone had opened a bank account fraudulently - that would have affected my rating ?

These agencies do not serve you. Unless you subscribe to their consumer products they have nothing whatsoever to do with you. They operate a B2B model - their customers are lenders and whoever else they can seduce into providing them with financial data about your business. At one time their purpose was to identify people who were bad payers, and sell that information to their customers. Now their purpose is to identify anyone who pays a bill late, no matter how late, or for how much. If you're late by one day for a payment of 0.01 p these agencies will blacklist you. They are in dire need of proper regulation. They are not fit for purpose and work against the general interest of consumers.


Just one CRA? Yes. My view is that the government should auction off a single licence for a UK CRA service. Having three agencies works very much against the interests of the consumer.

[Deleted User]

GingerBob wrote: »

If you're late by one day for a payment of 0.01 p these agencies will blacklist you.

They won't of course, because there are no blacklists and there are plenty of companies willing to lend to those with bad credit.

GingerBob_3

Deleted_User wrote: »

They won't of course, because there are no blacklists and there are plenty of companies willing to lend to those with bad credit.

Yes, you will always find some who are not too concerned about entries on the blacklist, but you'd struggle to find a mortgage provider in this category.

glentoran99

GingerBob wrote: »

Yes, you will always find some who are not too concerned about entries on the blacklist, but you'd struggle to find a mortgage provider in this category.

nonsense, plain and simple, I have just got a normal high street mortgage, have 3 defaults on file, (not just a 1p missed payment) ranging from 3000-12000 each


ive also got access to 3000 overdraft, and a normal Credit card with a 5000 limit


a "blacklist" doesn't exist