Credit rating ruined by EE

Ohic

Thanks very much will try this now.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Several threads here.

1- Cancelling a contract - so if you sign up to say a 24 month contact and indicate that you wish to cancel it ...then the earliest date you can end your relationship is 24 months. Does that explain why EE wanted to collect the last few payments and saw you as welching on your side of the contract?

2 - Always best to get confirmation of any cancellation in writing - then you can prove you did and make sure the basis as you wish / possible. Hindsight, I know.

3 - You don't say is you got a mobile phone as part of your contract - but let's assume you did. EE are effectively giving you a loan / credit so that you can pay both mobile use costs and for the phone over the contract duration - so why would EE not need access to credit scoring.

4 - Both a mobile phone contract (with phone) and a mortgage are similar in that the buyer makes a contractual commitment to pay a fixed amount "back" every month until then end. If you cannot do the smaller £££ version - why should someone trust you to do the larger ££££££ one.

5. Seems quite reasonable for a mortgage lender (being asked to loan a large sum) to be suspicious of someone who has outstanding and bad debt on a much smaller loan? The report is establishing habits as much as anything. Once sorted, then hopefully things can be looked at differently.

That said I suspect OP, you simply didn't quite appreciate the nature of your EE contract and now do. So pay off the debt asap and then read through this - http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/loans/check-free-credit-report.

As to the use of CRA in combatting fraud - seems the police think Call Credit can help them - http://www.actionfraud.police.uk/support-and-prevention/useful-organisations and CIFAS even call them fraud prevention - https://www.cifas.org.uk/what_is_a_credit_reference_agency. As to the assertion that the credit element is not relevant is to some degree irrelevant as the profile is a composite view. Of course, someone with just bad debts may well not be a fraudster at all.

GingerBob_3

Both a mobile phone contract (with phone) and a mortgage are similar in that the buyer makes a contractual commitment to pay a fixed amount "back" every month until then end. If you cannot do the smaller £££ version - why should someone trust you to do the larger ££££££ one.

That is a very simplistic view, if you don't mind me saying so. The two transactions are a world apart. Constantly we are getting reports here of phone companies (and utility providers) who shaft people's ability to obtain real credit due to trivial misunderstandings and mistakes. The system is fundamentally flawed in this respect - and of course lots of other respects as well. When providers get it wrong, as they often do, the only sanction is to pay minor compensation, if any. Very rarely are legal proceedings taken against them. At the very least there needs to be some sort of sanction that prevents them reporting if they keep getting it wrong (npower would have lost the privilege long ago on this basis).

ThinkingOutLoud_2

GingerBob wrote: »

That is a very simplistic view, if you don't mind me saying so. The two transactions are a world apart. Constantly we are getting reports here of phone companies (and utility providers) who shaft people's ability to obtain real credit due to trivial misunderstandings and mistakes. The system is fundamentally flawed in this respect - and of course lots of other respects as well. When providers get it wrong, as they often do, the only sanction is to pay minor compensation, if any. Very rarely are legal proceedings taken against them. At the very least there needs to be some sort of sanction that prevents them reporting if they keep getting it wrong (npower would have lost the privilege long ago on this basis).

Yes. There is merit in simplifying sometimes :-) A point you seem to agree with in terms of contact terms!

But the OP does not appear to have appreciated how their contract worked and is about to enter in to a mortgage that OP does (so it seems a useful comparison to make). Multiple payment over a specified period - no defaults are good.

The overall behaviour of mobile phone companies is not pertinent here, given it doesn't sound like they have been unreasonable on this occasion. Of course if they have, the OP can complain all the way to Ofcom. You need a different thread?

The abuse of the CRA data is again not something relevant to the OP. There has been no abuse to my mind. His bad debt was shown to a potential debtor. Again another thread?

My comments are focused on the OP's request, not putting the world to rights.

Arleen

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Yes. There is merit in simplifying sometimes :-) A point you seem to agree with in terms of contact terms!

But the OP does not appear to have appreciated how their contract worked and is about to enter in to a mortgage that OP does (so it seems a useful comparison to make). Multiple payment over a specified period - no defaults are good.

The overall behaviour of mobile phone companies is not pertinent here, given it doesn't sound like they have been unreasonable on this occasion. Of course if they have, the OP can complain all the way to Ofcom. You need a different thread?

The abuse of the CRA data is again not something relevant to the OP. There has been no abuse to my mind. His bad debt was shown to a potential debtor. Again another thread?

My comments are focused on the OP's request, not putting the world to rights.

But gingerbov didn't get to wave his empty slogans in a while. Guess in an empty river, even a boot can look like a fish and must be polluted by his "propaganda".

badmemory

Why would retentions have rung unless they knew the contract was terminated?

Why did they not use the updated address?

Do we just admit that many of them are incompetent and just shrug our shoulders and say oh that's okay then?

This thread and the many like it are the reasons why I would never take out a mobile phone contract.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

badmemory wrote: »

Why would retentions have rung unless they knew the contract was terminated?
Why did they not use the updated address?
Do we just admit that many of them are incompetent and just shrug our shoulders and say oh that's okay then?
This thread and the many like it are the reasons why I would never take out a mobile phone contract.

So retention will be charged with persuading you to not exit via the revolving door. They will try to intervene / call as and or after you give notice. No point waiting till you are an ex-customer on another deal.
The question seems why EE tried to collect 3 more months...was the 24 months over when he cancelled or was it at month 21 he asked to cancel? As as we both agree - he should try to discuss it with them.

As to the address, so it does seem odd. If you get a monthly bill and then don't get any for the immediate 6 months after advising of an address change ...why not call up and check sooner? I am sure their systems were simply never updated. But, this is a separate issue to resolve / complain about.

Badmemory
- As to you not getting a mobile - why not buy a £10 phone and a pay as you go sim for emergencies. Then, when that £10 runs out - the phone is a useful paperweight until you need to make another call when out of the house?
- May I assume you don't buy insurance, white goods, have a credit card, bank account or mortgage or go on holiday, etc. as these forums are replete with issues with those too...

GingerBob_3

Arleen wrote: »

But gingerbov didn't get to wave his empty slogans in a while. Guess in an empty river, even a boot can look like a fish and must be polluted by his "propaganda".

I've told you before; cut out the personal abuse. Reported next time.

Arleen

GingerBob wrote: »

I've told you before; cut out the personal abuse. Reported next time.

Go ahead this and previous time, as nothing that I've said was an abuse, not to mention a personal one. While doing so, check out what abuse means.

Chappaz

Never, ever, ever, ever cancel a direct debit until at least a few months have passed and there's clearly no further payments being taken out.

I made this mistake and I have a £14 default from a phone company which is fortunately due to drop off next year.

There's just no need. If you cancel a contract properly, no further amounts should come out so cancelling the DD makes no difference anyway. And if any further amounts do come out, no DD means no payment and therefore leaves them fully entitled to slap black marks on your credit report.

If there are additional payments to be made which you may dispute, it's frankly better to let them take them out of your account and then challenge them afterwards. At least that way, they can't mark anything bad on your report.

Is it fair? Not really. Do you feel like you're bent over a barrel? Absolutely. But it's best to be extra cautious, get everything confirmed properly and then wait before closing any DDs. The small sense of satisfaction you might feel by stopping them from taking money out which you don't feel they are due will come back to haunt you if you end up with a default and can't get a decent mortgage or car finance for 6 years.