CIFAS marker led to loss of employment

Manxman_in_exile

mark2200 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

AskAsk said:

SeanG79 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

EDIT:  Ah just read the other thread referred to above...   What is "cross firing and kiting", or is it better I don't know?  The OP admits doing it - once - whatever it is

Cross Firing/Kiting typically involves passing a series of cheques at two or more banks, using accounts that have insufficient funds. Relying on the time required for a cheque deposited at one bank to clear at another, the kiter writes cheque(s) at the first bank against an account at the other. Before that cheque clears, they then withdraw the funds from the second bank account and deposits the funds back into the first. 

But when it catches up, the result is a CIFAS marker or National Hunter record 

this sounds like a scam.

I'm sure it is and that's why there's a CIFAS marker.  According to Wikipedia the sort of practice outlined above is illegal in the US.

(NB - the suggestion that what the OP may have been doing was cross firing and kiting was made in the other thread on the banking board.  I read it yesterday but I think previous posters above are now saying it's been deleted.  I say "may have" as that conclusion was only based on the sketchy outline from the OP about what he had been doing.  Maybe this thread will go the same way!)

My things were in regards to a credit card and a loan application- nothing to do with any cheques. 

You said in your original post:  "I have 2 markers in total. 1. was by Lloyds Bank for a credit card- the reason behind it was 'uncleared effects fraud'. They said I paid the monthly fee, then before it cleared I used some of the funds I was paying back... " 

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but isn't the bank accusing you of doing what was described in a post above about moving uncleared funds between different accounts?  I'm not sure cheques have to be involved - just the transfer of funds.

If you can demonstrate you weren't doing this I'm sure you can get the markers removed.  I'd just be a bit concerned that where you earlier said:  "... and the money i used off the credit card is money that was available" that Lloyds may feel that that money was not actually "available".

Good luck!

mark2200

AskAsk said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

mark2200 said:

John_ said:

mark2200 said:

AskAsk said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

mark2200 - sorry Mark, I'm a bit confused because you seem a bit confused.

You say in the opening post that "In the last month that employer has terminated my employment... ", and various posters have said that your employer can't do that without following a proper process, but that isn't what has happened is it?  Your employer has not terminated your employment have they, and they are following a process?  From the tone of that letter/email from them, your access to certain work systems seems to have been suspended and they are investigating further.  They're also giving you the chance to get the markers removed.  So you are still employed but under some sort of investigation.  Seems reasonable in the circumstances to me.

Also, and I don't want to appear unduly suspicious or be accusing you of anything, but your comment at the end of the opening post sounds a bit "unconcerned" to me.  "The other question i had was basically just wondering how/why exactly they would be considered fraud in the first place. I used money that was available to me and the address was my own legal address anyway  Just seems strange"   I don't want to sound unkind but that doesn't sound like an outright denial of the accusations to me - it sounds more as if you know what this is about and knew exactly what you were doing but don't think anything was wrong with it.  The phrase "my own legal address anyway" is not one I'd use - why qualify "my legal address", why not just say "my address"?  (I suppose if english is not your first language it may explain it).

i would be very surprised if the OP is foreign.  his speech sounds very english to me.  i talk to foreign people often and you always can tell when someone is foreign, even when their english is very good.  they just don't use certain words or phrases that someone from this country would use.

i do see your points, but the OP may be using the word legal because he is being accused of being illegal.

yeah im english. I didnt mean anything by legal, just when youre accused of being a fraudster/dodgy saying its my legal address felt like the natural thing to say.

But it was where i was living and i had multiple bills, accounts etc all there. Funnily (or annoyingly) enough the marker i have for my credit card, the address for that card on my cifas report is the exact same address the loan company said was 'inaccurate'  

Is it the place that you went home to an slept in each night, the only place that you did that?

At the time I owned a house and a flat. My bank accounts, electoral roll etc where all registered to my house- where the application was made for. 

Sorry - so after four pages we learn that you owned two different properties and that one of the CIFAS markers was associated with one of those addresses?  Is that where you lived or did you live at the other property?  Did you have any loans or credit cards etc where the applications used the other address?  If you did, the answer may be as simple as that.  Whether it would be easy to resolve or not, I don't know.

i know some people rent out their house and still pretend to live there, paying all the bills and registering to vote etc to avoid the tax man.  but they make a slip up because the tax man can see everyone who lives there, whether they pay the bills or not, or whether they register to vote.

i am not saying this is the case, but the OP could have rented his house out while still pretending to live there and taking out credit cards and loans at that address, while living in his flat and also taking out loans and credit cards at the flat as well.

this means that when a cross reference is made, it flags up problems with fraud.

That would make total sense, but I didn't rent either. Both were mine and I lived in both. My house was my regular home, and the flat I used to travel up to every other weekend (or so)

mark2200

Hey. Just wanted to put an update on this and also ask another question

So I managed to get 1 of the markers removed for the credit card. So essentially what happened is my direct debit went through, and normally it takes a few days to 'clear', and before it cleared a small amount was used, but the direct debit still went thru and after a couple of days it was fully credited on my credit card. At least that's the expansion I gave to cifas and they accepted everything. 

My issue now is with the one that I actually assumed would be easier to sort out. So first they took ages to come back to me (I assume this is just because it's a loan company and not like a major bank, Barclays, Lloyds, NatWest etc I'm assuming would naturally be alot quicker). So they left a marker on me for a 'false address' on a loan application. I sent them my driver's license, bank statement and bills to prove it wasn't false and I was living there though, I was also registered on the electoral roll there.

However the loan company sent me a letter and basically said they wouldn't remove it but they wouldn't go into any details. So I've now raised it with CIFAS and I'm waiting, but given I lived there I'm confident I'll get it removed

So to my question, my employer obviously requested my details from CIFAS before, so id just like to ask for anyone that knows, when these businesses request info (on me for example) do they just get like a headline 'xxxxx has a fraud marker' or do they get the same information us as individuals get on the report 'xxxxx committed application fraud for a false address'.     Or would they get like a proper explanation from the members that leave the markers (so essentially much more information than I got when I requested my report)

My employer naturally won't tell me, so instead of me just waiting for cifas to come back to me I was hoping to go to my employer to prove to them that it was my address, but unless they got a full and proper explanation from the loan company it's kind of pointless

Help would be appreciated. And thank you!

General_Grant

Others will probably be able to tell you but I don't know what data would have been given to your employer but I see no reason why you could not submit a data subject request to your employer in order to find out.

mark2200

General_Grant said:

Others will probably be able to tell you but I don't know what data would have been given to your employer but I see no reason why you could not submit a data subject request to your employer in order to find out.

I haven't done one with my employer, so that's a great idea. I'll send them an email about that now

I did do one with the loan company though and got a pdf document back but it just said my name, address number etc, date I made the application, date it was rejected etc. It didn't actually say ANYTHING about a false address, or fraud, or cifas (first thing I did was search all those terms on the doc)- I did find it strange none of them were mentioned as I assumed this would be something the company would HAVE to put down on the DSAR request.

Does anyone know if it should be mentioned?