GDPR & arrears

nic_c

Deleted_User wrote: »

I suspect we can all look forward to paying increased prices for most services, as the flood of free SARs come in.

Financial Services firms in particular will have a huge cost they'll need to cover through APR increases.

I suspect many have been working in the background for the perceived increase in requests, especially as because there was an associated fee then these were usually done in writing, and they would tell you to write in enclosing the fee. Now the requests can come in any form - get an email, reply requesting a DSAR, get a phonecall - request the DSAR over the phone. No longer can they insist you write in. It also means all customer facing employees need to be aware of this (I suspect even now many are still being informed).
There is also the possibility of class action style requests. If a firm gets consent from say 1000's of people (like for misselling claims), they can do an en masse request.

nic_c

Agent16f wrote: »

It was not directed as a means to removing a credit file, as this comes under the CONSENT part of GDPR. I was referring to the right to restrict processing given to a single company that provides its data to the CRA using the legitimate business use of public interest. Article 6(1)

My point was how is it in the public interest to provide this information in a commercial capacity.

Its not public interest, but legitimate commercial ones. You consent to your data being given as part of the contract, the CRA's commercial interest to carry out their business is to store the data from the lenders, securely and auditably, and provide that to companies where you may be an existing or new customer. You can't just apply one part of it, just like you can't say the "right to be forgotten" means I want my data deleting, you can't say the passing of data to a commercial company is not public interest and so I object.

T-G-C

Experian has confirmed, in a sugarcoated wording, that requests for deletion will almost always be refused, as the data held about consumers are integral to the finance sector.

I would imagine, although this hasn't been confirmed, that deletion of consumer data would be approved in a limited number of circumstances, such as:

- Death of the data subject.

That's all I can think of to be honest.

Even then, if there is someone linked with that file who is still alive, and the deceased person had a bad record of defaulting etc. there could be grounds to retain that data further until the full 6 years are up.

antrobus

Agent16f wrote: »

Registry trust ltd are not part of the cra when has anybody ever given them their consent.

I don't understand what you mean. As far as I'm aware, Registry Trust maintains the CCJ register for the MoJ. CCJs are in the public domain, I believe. It's a public record.

antrobus

T-G-C wrote: »

Experian has confirmed, in a sugarcoated wording, that requests for deletion will almost always be refused, as the data held about consumers are integral to the finance sector.
...

There is something called CRAIN - the Credit Reference Agency Information Notice.
http://www.experian.co.uk/crain/index.html

Which sets out how the three main credit reference agencies Callcredit, Equifax and Experian, will deal with GDPR.

See question 11. CAN I OBJECT TO THE USE OF MY PERSONAL DATA AND HAVE IT DELETED?

Please note that, because of the importance of the credit referencing industry to the UK’s financial system, and the important purposes the personal data is needed for (like supporting responsible lending, and preventing over indebtedness, fraud and money laundering) it will be very rare that the CRAs do not have compelling, overriding grounds to carry on using the personal data following an objection. In many cases, it won’t be appropriate for the CRAs to restrict or to stop processing or delete bureau data, for example, where the result would be to hide a poor credit history that could enable a person or organisation to get credit they otherwise wouldn’t be eligible for.

Or roughly translated, 'no'.

Brooker_Dave

antrobus wrote: »

Which sets out how the three main credit reference agencies Callcredit, Equifax and Experian, will deal with GDPR.

Or roughly translated, 'no'.

Well they would say that, wouldn't they.

The last thing they want is for people to exercise their rights.

nic_c

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

Well they would say that, wouldn't they.

The last thing they want is for people to exercise their rights.

Which rights are those? Rights to run up loads of debt and say the CRA's can not report that you have run up loads of debt because you never signed a contract, you aren't a "MR" that's a given title implied by your birth certificate etc #freemanoftheland

Brooker_Dave

nic_c wrote: »

Which rights are those?

The ones we have under the laws of this country.

Or do you think the needs of CRAs and banks trump are more important?

nic_c

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

The ones we have under the laws of this country.

Or do you think the needs of CRAs and banks trump are more important?

So you mean all the laws of this country, or just the ones that you consent to?

The CRA's hold your last six years of financial data and they only keep things like hard/soft searches for a year. The data is reported as part of T&C on products you accept by using.

Requesting data be deleted because you'd rather people didn't know you defaulted on a credit card and moved away in the hope you could escape it (I am not saying this is you, and apologies if it comes across as that, but the main reason why people are discussing the erasure part of GDPR is because of past misdemeanors not because they have an impeccable role model financial history)

sargeantsalt

nic_c wrote: »

So you mean all the laws of this country, or just the ones that you consent to?

The CRA's hold your last six years of financial data and they only keep things like hard/soft searches for a year. The data is reported as part of T&C on products you accept by using.

Requesting data be deleted because you'd rather people didn't know you defaulted on a credit card and moved away in the hope you could escape it (I am not saying this is you, and apologies if it comes across as that, but the main reason why people are discussing the erasure part of GDPR is because of past misdemeanors not because they have an impeccable role model financial history)

Those with a bad history need to take responsibility for it so I can see why that would not be deleted, but that argument is also being used to say that those with a clean record and no debt should not be deleted either.