Inaccurate data sharing compensation

[Deleted User]

Has anyone successfully claimed for inaccurate data sharing compensation?  
For over two years Three placed a default on my credit file for a closed, fully paid off account at a previous address. They refused to discuss the matter with me (even via post) as I had moved. I provided identification document copies (passport, license, utility bill) and they just continued to insist they could only talk to the account address on file. They literally wrote to me at my new home address saying they could not write to me at my new home address. They wouldn't speak to me on the phone as I could not remember which bank account was historically attached to the account.  What they were happy to do was send debt letters to my new home address asking for payment of some mythical 30 pounds.

I did a DSAR including ID and utility bill and three sent the entire account details to my new home address (no data protection issue there). The letter that confirmedthe acocunt was closed was suspiciously missing, but a reference  to it was in he account notes. I asked (as part of the DSAR) for a copy of this missing letter that confirmed the account was closed with a zero balance - and three's data controller denied a copy existed.

Luckily for me, I still had my copy. 

I put in a complaint that their data protection was being used as an excuse to not resolve the matter - again including copies of ID,  utility bill - and that I wanted this 30 pounds default wiped off as the account had clearly been closed in 2017. The 30 pounds was somehow accrued on the account in 2018, well after it was settled and closed. 

but Three wrote back saying they couldn't speak to me because of - guess what - data protection. It was comical. 

So they then sent the debt to Lowells. It was actually Lowells that listened to reason, were happy to talk to me, agreed that the account was closed and fully paid off, the charges from 2018 could not have been from that account as it was closed  for over a year - they removed the default and closed everything out (I know, I was just as surprised at Lowells with this myself)

So for two years I struggled get mainstream credit, for two years i gave three the opportunity and chances to fix this but they just ignored it at every turn. 

Does anyone have any advice for next steps? ICO? Direct to county court (and if so, what areas of contract law would apply? I feel at the very least they need to not  be doing this to other people, there is obviously a systematic problem with procedure at minimum, potentially a problem in their account management systems and definitely a problem in their understanding of talking to Data Subjects. 

[Deleted User]

Complain to three formally (writing, get proof of postage from PO) mark the envelope clearly as "COMPLAINT"
As and when they deal with it, go above them to the regulator and maybe ICO

Record your actual losses, if you don't have any then who knows what you might get

Don't go to court, you'll be laughed out if you haven't done the complaints process and how are you going to quantify losses?

ThisnotThat

You're not going to get compensation because you were turned down for credit (if you even were.)  That's not a "loss" that a court will entertain.

If it were me I'd consider this a win and move on with my life.

[Deleted User]

Deleted_User said:

Complain to three formally (writing, get proof of postage from PO) mark the envelope clearly as "COMPLAINT"
As and when they deal with it, go above them to the regulator and maybe ICO

Record your actual losses, if you don't have any then who knows what you might get

Don't go to court, you'll be laughed out if you haven't done the complaints process and how are you going to quantify losses?

I did complain,  formally, in writing with a recorded delivery number to their complaints team. The complaint had my ID copies and the complaint response said they could not talk to me for data protection reasons. 

Regarding quantifying losses, I have a record of hard searches from credit file and then the letters from the credit provider where I was then declined an account. The only negative entry on the file was Three default (no missed payment markers, no defaults, no CCJ, all credit card utilization under 25%). The only credit providers that  would accept me were higher interest providers and I can demonstrate 2 years of paying higher interest rates and quantity those down to the pound and how much they were above regular mainstream rates. 
You also can claim over and above financial loss, according to the ICO (search their site for 'taking your case to court and claiming compensation'  "

• claim compensation for any damage caused by any organisation if they have broken data protection law, including any distress you may have suffered, or

... thats kinda the point of my post. Has anyone actually done this or is it just pie in the sky thinking from the ICO - the protection is there in law but courts wont enforce it? 

ThisnotThat

savehound said:

Deleted_User said:

Complain to three formally (writing, get proof of postage from PO) mark the envelope clearly as "COMPLAINT"
As and when they deal with it, go above them to the regulator and maybe ICO

Record your actual losses, if you don't have any then who knows what you might get

Don't go to court, you'll be laughed out if you haven't done the complaints process and how are you going to quantify losses?

I did complain,  formally, in writing with a recorded delivery number to their complaints team. The complaint had my ID copies and the complaint response said they could not talk to me for data protection reasons. 

Regarding quantifying losses, I have a record of hard searches from credit file and then the letters from the credit provider where I was then declined an account. The only negative entry on the file was Three default (no missed payment markers, no defaults, no CCJ, all credit card utilization under 25%). The only credit providers that  would accept me were higher interest providers and I can demonstrate 2 years of paying higher interest rates and quantity those down to the pound and how much they were above regular mainstream rates. 
You also can claim over and above financial loss, according to the ICO (search their site for 'taking your case to court and claiming compensation'  "

• claim compensation for any damage caused by any organisation if they have broken data protection law, including any distress you may have suffered, or

... thats kinda the point of my post. Has anyone actually done this or is it just pie in the sky thinking from the ICO - the protection is there in law but courts wont enforce it? 

You have a duty to mitigate your losses.  By applying for high-interest credit you didn't do this.  You could have avoided high-interest credit by not applying for it.  You won't be compensated by a court for this.

[Deleted User]

ThisnotThat said:
You have a duty to mitigate your losses.  By applying for high-interest credit you didn't do this.  You could have avoided high-interest credit by not applying for it.  You won't be compensated by a court for this.

OK so  your opinion is that the only real option would be to claim for the distress then?

ThisnotThat

savehound said:

ThisnotThat said:
You have a duty to mitigate your losses.  By applying for high-interest credit you didn't do this.  You could have avoided high-interest credit by not applying for it.  You won't be compensated by a court for this.

OK so  your opinion is that the only real option would be to claim for the distress then?

I wouldn't bother. It's a lot of faffing around for maybe £50.

[Deleted User]

ThisnotThat said:

I wouldn't bother. It's a lot of faffing around for maybe £50.

So basically there is nothing the consumer can do (other than a small amount and some satisfaction) to prevent big organization sharing data inaccurately. Only the ICO has the teeth? I guess ill just do the ICO complaint then, which will no doubt get looked at in 3 years time hehe

ThisnotThat

savehound said:

ThisnotThat said:

I wouldn't bother. It's a lot of faffing around for maybe £50.

So basically there is nothing the consumer can do (other than a small amount and some satisfaction) to prevent big organization sharing data inaccurately. Only the ICO has the teeth? I guess ill just do the ICO complaint then, which will no doubt get looked at in 3 years time hehe

Even the ICO won't really do anything.   Unless there is a mass of complaints and/or a big enough stink is kicked up by the media, nothing will really happen.

C'est la vie.

[Deleted User]

So absolutely nothing to stop companies acting with impunity. great.

[Deleted User]

savehound said:

So absolutely nothing to stop companies acting with impunity. great.

That's obviously not true, as you'll see if you search for some of the recent huge data protection fines issued.

But the ICO look at large scale breaches and fundamental flaws, not one off individual errors.