Getting a mortgage with marker on fraud database.

Col_Buch

SuseOrm said:

 I got one removed by Aldermore simply because what they presented - and was recorded against my name - was opinion not fact.  They conceded it was opinion not fact and took it down but what if they hadn’t ?  

@SuseOrm Absolutely, I’m really hoping I can get it rectified and sorted asap. Did you find the process difficult and stressful? 

RAS

There was an instance a while back when someone reporting here had tried to pre-book house insurance for a property which they were buying and used their future address, then used their current address to organise something else and the system said fraud and his mortgage offer was rescinded . Don't know if he got it sorted out in time to buy the house.

On the other hand, one of the organisations to which my old employer reported used Hunter. However, the organisation always contacted the person of concern and asked them to provide supporting documentation. I learned to keep applications open, as that was the only way we ever learned what happened in the investigation. Sometimes it was as simple as someone moving and not updating records, so they didn't even respond to queries. Other times it was forged documents and fraud. 

We reinstated those whose applications were "out of time"  or whose documents took time to verify if they were unfortunate rather than unacceptable.   Although occasionally they got an offer for the next cycle. 

Chris_English

steampowered said:

Chris_English said

It’s a response to huge losses on loans extended to fraudulent applicants. If an incorrect entry has been made then there’s no need to get the ombudsman involved, as the company reporting it will change it when given the correct information.
...
The alternative is that lenders return to the old system of only lending to people who the local branch manager believes are a good prospect, which would just shut off the credit market for most of the people who are currently being excluded by the credit agencies.

I think a better alternative is to have a properly managed, transparent and accountable system. It doesn't sit right that people who are completely innocent can be blacklisted from the mainstream financial system without their knowledge and without any checks or right of appeal. 

I don’t agree. A company should be able to decline to do business with you for any reason, or for nine at all, other than for legally protected characteristics.

Riva69

steampowered said:

Chris_English said

It’s a response to huge losses on loans extended to fraudulent applicants. If an incorrect entry has been made then there’s no need to get the ombudsman involved, as the company reporting it will change it when given the correct information.
...
The alternative is that lenders return to the old system of only lending to people who the local branch manager believes are a good prospect, which would just shut off the credit market for most of the people who are currently being excluded by the credit agencies.

I think a better alternative is to have a properly managed, transparent and accountable system. It doesn't sit right that people who are completely innocent can be blacklisted from the mainstream financial system without their knowledge and without any checks or right of appeal. 

Hopefully the company involved will fix the reporting when given the correct information - but if the Op has indeed been blacklisted I wouldn't hold up much hope.

The system reminds me of the situation where people were getting blacklisted from construction jobs with no accountability or oversight in the system, thankfully those people were awarded thousands of pounds in compensation:  like https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/14/50-blacklisted-trade-unionists-win-19m-from-building-firms. 

I agree with you steampowered, we can’t have a system whereby people are denied the opportunity to challange these systems. If the banks believe someone has made a fraudulent application then as that is a criminal offence it should then be treated like a criminal offence, which means the defendant has an opportunity to submit evidence and the banks have to provide evidence. So while Cifas does place a burden of responsibility on the lender to have such evidence, Hunter snd sira do not.

And col_buch I hope you manage to get these removed and if not I hope it is for the time you stated as my understanding was that a refer was now 6 years. But I really could be wrong here. 

In my case I have just found out I have a marker placed on me by HSBC and am currently awaiting for the DSAR to come back from HSBC so I can hopefully find out why as I have no idea why it could have been put there as everything I provided in my application was correct and genuine. However to be treat the way I have been and to find out the damage it can and has done to my life is awful. I have already lost the first house I was purchasing as I am having to wait for all the dsars to come back and my seller wouldn’t wait. HSBC are refusing to tell me why they have put the marker there even though I have offered to provide further evidence of everything I submitted with my application. It will take at least 6 months for the case to be fully investigated by the ombudsman and in the meanwhile I have to leave my rented accommodation and could potentially have nowhere to live because it is hugely unlikely another lender will give me a mortgage and renting will be difficult too. 

I did have issues with the HSBC online application form and wonder if it was this but as I called up straight after to state the issues I had and asked if everything was received ok, I have no idea if it was something on their clunky, timing out system or something they suspected about my documents. However as these were all genuine, it may take me some time to find out.

@SuseOrm, that’s amazing you got yours removed and would love to hear how you made that happen as for me, HSBC have refused to communicate and say they will only talk from now on to the ombudsman. They even sent the values out to the property after I was declined which added even more embarrassment to me with the estate agents but what has outraged me the most is not once throughout the few days they took to decline my application or after despite me asking, did they once ask me for further explanation or evidence, because surely as all my entries before HSBC on these registers were clear and in good standing, it would have made sense to investigate further considering every other entry previously had no zero reported issues. 

I have been in touch with a reporter though and they are very interested in running the story in quite a big paper so if I don’t hear back from HSBC, I am considering doing this as people have a right to know how companies like HSBC are using this database to add peoples names to it without giving the person an opportunity to either provide more evidence or see the evidence or reason they have been placed there. 

Like I say I am outraged that people can be removed from accessing normal credit facilities and mortgages without being able to defend oneself or even be told why. Because when I found out I was declined I was definitely not given a reason why. 

Col_Buch

@Riva69 I agree with everything you’ve said. HSBC are one who have put a marker on me, there was two applications made in the space of 24 hours because of their stupid timeout/ system going down etc. I called to say I was having difficulty and explained my issues, they informed me there wasn’t any applications made and I must start again- therefore I did. Then when I rang to chase, they had closed the app down due to there being two applications and told me they’d send a letter explaining. I really hope you get to the bottom of your issues, please do update on this thread it may help in some way. 

@Chris_English yes companies should be able to refuse, however they should also state why just a brief explanation would be suffice. That way if they suspect something it gives the applicant a chance to sort the issue (or not if it is a fraudulent case) before it gets too damaging. Nobody is saying, they then must accept your application, but at least then it enables the applicant to find an alternative provider. 

Riva69

Col_Buch said:

@Riva69 I agree with everything you’ve said. HSBC are one who have put a marker on me, there was two applications made in the space of 24 hours because of their stupid timeout/ system going down etc. I called to say I was having difficulty and explained my issues, they informed me there wasn’t any applications made and I must start again- therefore I did. Then when I rang to chase, they had closed the app down due to there being two applications and told me they’d send a letter explaining. I really hope you get to the bottom of your issues, please do update on this thread it may help in some way. 

@Chris_English yes companies should be able to refuse, however they should also state why just a brief explanation would be suffice. That way if they suspect something it gives the applicant a chance to sort the issue (or not if it is a fraudulent case) before it gets too damaging. Nobody is saying, they then must accept your application, but at least then it enables the applicant to find an alternative provider. 

@Col_Buch oh my goodness I have had the same issues with the online app as it timed out half way through the 1st application and then I had to start it again but during the 2nd application it kept bugging out and wouldn’t let me move back and forth through the various parts. I was really worried it either hadn’t gone through or there was mistakes with it so rang HSBC to clarify and explain my issues. 

Was told it had all been received and to upload documents which I did, I then rang every day to make sure everything was uploading to them and if they needed any further info/documents. My online status then changed to cancelled and for 6 days I was told it was still under review but also received the letter and a phone call saying I had been declined.

Different people were telling me different things so I raised a complaint and sent in DSAR’s to all the fraud prevention agencies. In the meanwhile HSBC said they would no longer communicate with me and I was left with no other option to raise a case with financial ombudsman.

At not one point throughout the whole process or since has anyone from HSBC asked me to clarify my documents or personal details or respond to my queries about the issues I had faced with the online application form.

To add salt to the wound they then sent a valuation company out to value the property 6 days after registering a fraud marker against my name and sending me the decline letter. This has caused huge embarrassment with the seller (who is no longer selling to me because of this) and the estate agent. 

My complaint was also closed over 2 weeks ago and then just 3 working days ago I received an email apologising for me having to wait while they resolved my complaint.

I also have 3 different service quality assurance people sending me different responses, which makes me definitely question their ability to follow procedure for registering people on a fraud register.

The whole process from the online application to the way my complaint has been handled has been below any level I would expect from a major bank like HSBC and the only options I have now are the financial ombudsman case I have opened and allowing the press to report my experiences, which I am reluctant to do as don’t feel I want to go in the papers. 

Riva69

I think my advice would be for people to be hugely wary of submitting an online mortgage application with HSBC due to how clunky and problematic it was, as while some will go through ok, I have seen many complaints on forums where people have experienced the issues we have in this thread.

And while the customer service advisors are lovely they just don’t have the power or information to help or make anyone call you back.

And then literally HSBC just cut you off from any communication and you are left with a fraud marker against your name and a 6 month wait to get it investigated. Personally I wasn’t interested in financial compensation for how my application and complaint has been handled but now that HSBC are continuing to make mistakes with emails and valuations etc and leaving me in the position where I am most likely to be unable to get another mortgage, rent another home to live in, I really don’t have much choice but to add this to my complaint against them. 

SuseOrm

I didn’t find the process stressful but that was purely because I would Aldermore went yeah fair enough no problem and took it down I genuinely do not believe that if they hadn’t of been so amicable it wouldn’t have been removed because they’re entitled to their opinion and I’m entitled to say it’s wrong, what earth is the ombudsman meant to do in that situation ? 

Riva69

SuseOrm said:

I didn’t find the process stressful but that was purely because I would Aldermore went yeah fair enough no problem and took it down I genuinely do not believe that if they hadn’t of been so amicable it wouldn’t have been removed because they’re entitled to their opinion and I’m entitled to say it’s wrong, what earth is the ombudsman meant to do in that situation ? 

Because the markers have so much impact on peoples ability to get credit there is a level of evidence and responsibility each bank must follow before they place a fraud marker, but as not many people know it has been done, they tend to not get challenged very often meaning the pressure to follow the rules is lessened.

The companies that operate these databases for the banks say that the markers aren’t meant to stop another lender declining someone but then sell software that actually allows a member to auto decline if a marker is present. 

There are lots of cases about banks who refused to remove markers on the financial ombudsman page and then some cases where it looks likely the people have committed fraud so the marker stays. 

But at least there is some option of someone looking at it fairly and making a decision that the lender would have agree too. 

But wow that’s pretty good of aldermore to remove it, did they tell you they had placed it or did they just decline you and you pushed for a reason why? 

SuseOrm

No they didnt tell me about the marker,  i got declined by them,  which i knew the reason for.  But it was opinion not fact.
And i did get turned down for another bank whilst it was there.