Linked address causing problems

GingerBob_3

glentoran99 wrote: »

I think your confusing linked addresses with address history, Linked addresses are when you are financially associated with someone else at that address

Could be. I am talking about address history here. For the OP then, he's presumably talking more about a financial association, which of course also comes with a raft of problems brought about by the CRAs.

JimmyTheWig

Why would they describe a financial association with someone as a "linked address"?
No wonder GingerBob and I were confused!

If it's a financial association that's the problem then that makes more sense.

glentoran99

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Why would they describe a financial association with someone as a "linked address"?
No wonder GingerBob and I were confused!

If it's a financial association that's the problem then that makes more sense.

Dunno, but when I look at mine I have previous addresses and linked addresses, the linked address is my Dads from when he was guarantor on my first ever car loan 15 years ago (so much for 6 years)

glentoran99

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Linked addresses are all the addresses that you or any of your financial associates have lived at [/FONT]

• Linked address information remains on the credit report indefinitely

GingerBob_3

glentoran99 wrote: »

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Linked addresses are all the addresses that you or any of your financial associates have lived at [/FONT]

• Linked address information remains on the credit report indefinitely

It's a fundamental data protection principle that personal data should be kept no longer than necessary. I wonder how the CRAs explain away having to keep address data indefinitely, even though they only keep account data for six years (actually they keep that indefinitely as well)? What possible use is there for address data going back 10, 20 or even 30 years! Answers on a postcard ....

ShellWright6

Applied with co-op bank. I did think about FD but I'd banked with them in the past.

I'm going to speak to them see exactly what it is that they mean as all she said originally was that it was a linked address. I've lived in rented properties for the last 8 years but I wasn't aware that you could be blacklisted against an address.

Having previously not had any issues getting credit it now baffles me as to why I'm being declined. My bills are paid on time, there's nothing on my credit report that stands out as fraudulent at all

JimmyTheWig

ShellWright6 wrote: »

I wasn't aware that you could be blacklisted against an address.

You can't. (If we accept what we are told about credit reference agencies.)

As far as I am aware, credit reference agencies don't pass on details about people who happened to have lived at the same address as you.
But it's not unreasonable that a bank hold a list of addresses where people have lived who caused them particular stress. If you lived there, too, then that bank may well reject you.

Lets say that over the past 5 years this particular bank has had to close the accounts of 7 different people at the same address for threatening behaviour towards their staff. You now live there and apply to the same bank. They might decide to turn you down. Likewise if you lived there in the past.

But my point is that other banks wouldn't have this information. And credit reference agencies wouldn't pass it across with your details. So you'd only get a problem with the one bank that had the problem with this address.

GingerBob_3

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

You can't. (If we accept what we are told about credit reference agencies.)

As far as I am aware, credit reference agencies don't pass on details about people who happened to have lived at the same address as you.
But it's not unreasonable that a bank hold a list of addresses where people have lived who caused them particular stress. If you lived there, too, then that bank may well reject you.

Lets say that over the past 5 years this particular bank has had to close the accounts of 7 different people at the same address for threatening behaviour towards their staff. You now live there and apply to the same bank. They might decide to turn you down. Likewise if you lived there in the past.

But my point is that other banks wouldn't have this information. And credit reference agencies wouldn't pass it across with your details. So you'd only get a problem with the one bank that had the problem with this address.

The trouble is, CRAs furnish their customers with your complete address history, apparently right back to when you were 18. So you apply for credit to a bank, the bank gets all your addresses and says "has this person ever lived at one of the addresses on our blacklist? Yes he has, so he can go and whistle!" Blacklisting! With the current regime operated by the CRAs you can't stop it.

Anthorn

Virtually the only way an address can be linked to you is when it is reported by a company/lender which reports to the CRA. If that's the case your credit report will show who last reported to the CRA a different address you lived at and that information will usually come from something you have volunteered such as a change of address.

Financial associates usually come from such things as a joint account or an account which you are jointly responsible for. But the address of the financial associate is not a linked address unless you have lived there.

Needs checking because mistakes do happen. A few years ago my son applied for a phone account and mistakenly used my address (his previous address) as his primary address. We only found out about it when an engineer turned up to fit a new line. We changed his address with the phone company but his new address appeared on my credit history as a linked address. I successfully challenged that because I never lived there and it was subsequently removed.

GingerBob_3

Is there any particular reason why CRAs keep address data indefinitely? I can't think of a valid one. Addresses outside the six year account history window should be deleted.