How common is it to find another person's personal and financial information on a Credit Report?

CFELH

I had an alert today from Clearscore regarding updated details. When I checked, I found an address in NI added to my Equifax report along with several financial accounts. None of which belong to me, or do I have any knowledge of them. I believe the person has the same name and DOB as me.

I remember something similar happening to me around 10 years ago, again with someone in NI with the same name and DOB (not sure if it is the same person).

Nasqueron

Not at all common, complain to Equifax formally and report them to the ICO

flaneurs_lobster

The stats say that if you have a common name (hello David Smith) then there are likely to be 5-6 people in the UK who share your DoB. Include a middle/second name then that becomes negligible.

Don't think it's hard that such data gets added to the wrong account for something like Equifax. Only going to be an issue if you are looking for credit/loan (and the other David Smith is a wrong 'un) but probably best to point out the error to Equifax.

Suppose you should also consider that your namesake might well be seeing your details too.

Have you checked the other credit reference agencies?

CFELH

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82038416#Comment_82038416

It only appears to be Equifax, I've lodged a dispute with them via Clearscore. The other 'me' as it were appears to be a good 'un (up to date with payments, a nice house and all the other trimmings). I'm boring, nothing to sell to the News of the World and have no debt. In contrast, the other 'me' appears to a pillar of the community and well……. goes to show what I can find out about a person with a few basic details left on a CRF !

MyRealNameToo

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82038416#Comment_82038416

Is your statistics factor in fuzzy logic matching? Not all data coming in has all fields completed; they have to be able to deal with the fact that people move addresses, change names etc and not all may change at the same time. They are also trying to protect against people using diminutive versions of their names, alternative spellings etc

In a prior life used to do annuities/pensions, many of which were written as "spouse at time of retirement". We had lots of problems with people divorcing/splitting from their spouse after retirement and so when we speak to their representatives after their death on if their Ex is still alive or not and many simply didnt know what had happened to them. So we used the CRAs, gave them what we knew about the spouse, which sometimes could be almost nothing, and they return to us if they have found someone who they think is the spouse with a confidence factor. If it was 95%+ or so then we got their details and would do tracing if it was lower we didnt get give the details. This then flows into the capital model which proves to regulators we are holding enough funds to pay the pension in case the Ex comes out the woodwork in a few years time; contrary to popular believe we can't just decide they must have died before our insured and therefore we can go have a party on the reserve we've just released.

I believe CRAs apply similar ideas to their own data, they dont require a perfect match to add the records together but do need a very high confidence factor. Its somewhat necessary else people could continue getting credit after multiple CCJs by just changing their name slightly on a new application or moving address.

Ultimately the OP in the first instance needs to raise it with the CRA who will do their investigations.

CFELH

The information supplied by the CRAs on mixed / merged data and ‘fuzzy matching’ opens other questions.

If a bank or other financial institution is responsible for recording or submitting incorrect information to the CRA, then in my case two independent banks, a telecoms and internet provider (not related) and the electoral role record have all provided incorrect data simultaneously.

Alternatively, Equifax or another agency with access to all the other parties data has merged two reports.

Returning to ‘John Smith’. We now live in a multicultural country, where John Smith is almost rare compared to _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (fill in the blanks, I’m not touching this subject with a bargepole).

I would imagine in these communities, my situation must be quite common.

flaneurs_lobster

You are right of course, the error here is by Equifax.

Are you tempted to make contact with the other "Dave"? No need to, just that they might not be aware of this data sharing and may want to take their own actions.