British Gas default RE-ADDED after 6 years

Arleen

MrsTinks wrote: »

UNLESS the error has been pointed out and is continuously ignored at which point it becomes neglectfully criminal - based on my admittedly limited knowledge of law in this country...

I don't think we had a case of that in UK yet, at least I can't find such in westlaw quickly. It makes sense though, as this would require not only to have a wide-scale, schematic, problem which impact large group of customers, but also for the organization to do nothing to try to rectify it (hence establishing that they did it with intent). The fix may not work, but at least they keep trying to improve it. And still your recourse, and what you should be recommeding, is to report such incidents to the ombudsman as he is the body to issue fines in that matter.

rizla_king

GingerBob wrote: »

There mere fact that a date of 2009 is uploaded to the CRA database should set alarm bells ringing, and further checks should then be carried out. And if you tell me the original date of the default is not provided in such circumstances, then that's even worse - that's if their data processing regime could get any worse!

They said the default had been re-registered. Not that dates of 2009 had been re-addded with the data.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Well fact remains companies make mistakes and screw up credit records. I advocate protecting oneself from that by at the very least having the account held as "The Occupier". As long as the firm gets paid what harm is there going on? If they screw up the credit file at least you are covered.

Arleen

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

Well fact remains companies make mistakes and screw up credit records. I advocate protecting oneself from that by at the very least having the account held as "The Occupier". As long as the firm gets paid what harm is there going on? If they screw up the credit file at least you are covered.

The one explained before, that unless you will then include "The Occupier" as your other name when asked about it you may be commiting a fraud.

To explain to you why, if we were to follow your reasoning - where does it end? Can I get credit cards in different names? In the end banks are unfair and screw up people credit files too. And if they do screw up mine then rest of my file is protected. Why not do the same for bank accounts too? Or personal loans? Hell, I disagree that I should pay late fees on personal loan, was late only 1 day! And this way they won't ruin my file.
There is no difference between those instruments besides your personal preference, and yet I doubt that you will agree with those examples. Law doesn't work on preference, and while in UK we enjoy very lax rules regard changing names that comes with obligation to keep good track of them and not lie about them.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Well all I can say is I have never had any issues from utility suppliers with just being "The Occupier". They send a bill and I pay it. But I had the red bill from the water company recently and paid on that. Not sure how they record the "late" payment but it certainly isn't on my credit file as I monitor that.

Arleen

That is the key part - because you do pay. If, Cthulhu forbid, one day something happens to you and you won't be able to pay, that is when the game will be up and you may very well wind up with a fraud marker.

GingerBob_3

Arleen wrote: »

That is the key part - because you do pay. If, Cthulhu forbid, one day something happens to you and you won't be able to pay, that is when the game will be up and you may very well wind up with a fraud marker.

That might happen if someone is using a false name to deliberately avoid payments, but I doubt it would happen even then to someone known as "The Occupier". I'd imagine a provider would sell a debt, if they could only identify someone as The Occupier - let someone else bother about it, would be their mantra.

Daver75

Hi,
I am hoping you may be able to help after I was recently declined for a mortgage.
British Gas have added a default date of Nov 17 to my report for an amount they consider to be owing from 2009/10. It is my understanding that the default should have been added 3 - 6 months after the amount first became in arrears. Initially, I could not even see it on my report and my score was high. I only got to see this by bringing my previous address forward in to the last 6 years, and then my score went from excellent to very poor. The only problem on my score is this British gas default, otherwise my credit history is very good.
I have appealed the default to British Gas on these grounds, as well as the fact I asked them to demonstrate that I owed the amount at the time in 2010, of which they were unable to do.
They have contacted me today to inform me they will not be removing the default and the reason it is on there is that they have reviewed the amount each year and added a default each year.
I have checked my credit report and there is only one '8' recorded in 2017 and 6's are recorded for the previous years before that. Should I not expect to see an 8 recorded each year if this was the case? Are they within their rights to do this as the default will never disappear? How can I appeal this further, as I believe that British Gas are acting improperly and outside the guidelines of the reporting of arrears and defaults as defined by the ICO.

[Deleted User]

You don't have a score or rating - ignore it.

Contact the ICO if you feel the default has not been added at the correct date

selfhelp

I had 2 x defaults entered against me (1 for gas and 1 for electric) and this was reported to 3 x credit reference agencies. This has seriously impacted on me at a very critical time. The defaults were registered against a property I did not live at and were estimated readings. No gas and electric were used as the house was being sold/on the market and given the modern build qualities no heating was required. I have written on numerous occasions to British Gas but they don't respond and I get the usual auto responder template drivel. Without the trauma of going to court what's the easiest route, is it a complaint to the ICO around incorrect and inaccurate information. Many thanks