Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

But Niddy's "character" is anonymous like The Stig and the Mona Lisa

Noooo loadsa people here know me! Loadsa people also know the stig

I'm just not as "big headed" as some forum administrators as this ain't about me, it's about you guys and the help we offer

[PlanB]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

Noooo loadsa people here know me! Loadsa people also know the stig

I'm just not as "big headed" as some forum administrators as this ain't about me, it's about you guys and the help we offer

Pah. This isn't about competitive egos (which you genuinely have never ever put forward) it's about whether you would have got a Barclaycard at 0% interest rate or any mortgage product or indeed any line of credit at all during the 13 months and beyond since Opus put that rubbish on your credit file (and the Default applied on your file this weekend?) isn't it? Hence your claim for damages. Clever Clogs where are you? Work with me here

[PlanB]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

Defamation would certainly be one possible tort, but I would suggest that a better line to follow would be the financial losses caused by the company processing data incorrectly and inaccurately.

And isn't it also about being financially stultified due to incorrect adverse information on NIddy's credit files?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

And isn't it also about being financially stultified due to incorrect adverse information on NIddy's credit files?

I don't think this will wash as remember I have the incorrect link on my credit file with over 30 defaults (at the time of the Opus complaint). So yea, whilst "my" personal element at MY genuine addresses were all showing fine (nothing at all bad - not even a missed payment), since Opus in August and HSBC in April - I now have 3 defaults and a string of late payments against me, obviously I am fighting all 3 accounts but still, that's the problem - one "could" argue that this is having more of an adverse effect however I cannot exactly say that I used to work for the banks in a security / fraud capacity and know that if your file is clear for the last 3 years, thats it - they do not search back - as they'll deny this based on the fact that it is computer recognised also based on N Hunter / CIFAS / Analytics info etc.

My point is, generally if you have a solid 3 years of good credit accounts then anything after this is usually ignored via most lenders as most only perform a 3 year check (6 if you have any adverse/markers etc). However this is an equation, like most other credit related stuff meaning that it's not as simple as all that and they can prove this as well, so I cannot fight using that angle.

Thus, saying the late entries by Opus have adversely affected me will also fail (IMO) as these incorrect entries were there and based on the above, they will discount the fact they are all so old and not mine.

My main argument could be based around the fact that I do get credit file, ie I opened two HBOS accounts in July and have a few cards BUT with this new data against me, I cannot get anything so I argued that I cannot move the balance to a 0% card and thus they've held all interest and issued a refund of interest paid, since August, to compensate for this as if I did move to a 0% card elsewhere.

Making sense....?

Basically, my options are limited here.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

And isn't it also about being financially stultified due to incorrect adverse information on NIddy's credit files?

As one who quite understands the meaning of "stultified" - and also its etymology, from the Latin, stultus - I doubt that I would have applied it to Niddy.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

As one who quite understands the meaning of "stultified" - I doubt that I would have applied it to Niddy.

I don't know quite what you mean young man

[helmsman]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

I don't know quite what you mean young man

Had to look it up.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

Had to look it up.

I didn't...

[helmsman]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

I didn't...

Clever Clogs

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

Clever Clogs

Yes?

[Pixie]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

As one who quite understands the meaning of "stultified" - and also its etymology, from the Latin, stultus - I doubt that I would have applied it to Niddy.

Had to look it up.

I didn't...

Neither did I! (Latin O Level many years ago)

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

Brief update (of sorts) - still at stalemate here, as you know I did receive an offer that I actually accepted - but then got defaulted ---> #136

Well I pulled the plug on that offer - totally. Cheeky beggars, imagine defaulting me when they'd promised to actually remove all the "unlawful" derogatory markers that they'd previously left...

So, update as found below in my email Xchange with FOS

From: Niddy
Sent: 04 November 2011 14:52
To: FOS
Subject: RE: Your complaint about Progressive Credit Limited (Our ref: XXXXXXXX)
Importance: High

Hi FOS

Oh deary me - instead of clearing the derogatory markers against my name, I was notified earlier today that Opus had defaulted me - thing is they never sent a default notice and thus have breached s.87 & s.88 of Consumer Credit Act 1974.

As a result of this I now withdraw my acceptance offer and confirm I am looking to take legal action against them for this. I am utterly disgusted and fuming at their actions - who the hell do they think they are and more to the point who the hell do they think they are messing with?

Please therefore rescind my acceptance letter as sent by post to you, and please find out what Opus are doing with my account - assuming you have a direct contact there?

Attached, is a copy of my report from october and a current copy - notice how the entries totally differ from the original in October to the defaulted version today? What is this, can they just sit there and change data willy-nilly like this? Surely now you must agree an ombudsman needs to intervene here, I am fighting a losing battle against amateurs....

Thanks - a very stressed Niddy.

Attachments:
Opus Original Entry shows my entry in October yet Opus Default shows the entry from today 4th November.

Subject: RE: Your complaint about Progressive Credit Limited (Our reXXXXXXXXf: )
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 16:50:32 +0000
From: FOS
To: Niddy

Dear Mr Niddy

This is extremely disappointing. Opus confirmed that it had already submitted the request for your credit file to be cleared so it would appear that something has gone wrong again.

I received your recorded delivery package earlier this afternoon and have noted your request to rescind your conditional acceptance of the offer.

I have also e-mailed my contact at Opus and have requested an urgent response. Upon receipt I will update you as soon as I can. I note that you now wish for an ombudsman review and I will put the file forward as soon as I have a response from Opus, unless, based on any subsequent information received from Opus you wish to proceed differently . However, though you probably know this already, I just need to reiterate that should you wish to pursue Opus through the courts you will not be able to accept any ombudsman decision as this acceptance would be in full and final settlement.

Try not to get too stressed out about this, it is not good for your health. It is certainly very annoying and frustrating for both of us that this has happened. However, Opus has confirmed that it has already requested removal of all markers from your account and this will also include the default, so whatever else you decide to do in your complaint against Opus, at least hopefully your credit file will be sorted out sooner rather than later.

Yours sincerely,

Adjudicator

Subject: RE: Your complaint about Progressive Credit Limited (Our ref:XXXXXXXX )
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:04:42 +0000
From: FOS
To: Niddy

Dear Mr Niddy

I spoke to Opus and it has confirmed that it has again contacted the credit reference agencies to get the default removed. The lady I spoke to could not explain why it had been registered after two good months.

I have insisted that she find out exactly why it occurred as I did not want there to be an unexpected reoccurrence in the future. She is going to investigate and contact the collections department though she has said that it could take a week or two. I have told her that I expect a response in no more than a week due to the delay that has already occurred.

I will let you know as soon as I receive a response, at which time you will need to decide what you wish to do.

Yours sincerely,

Adjudicator

Subject: RE: Your complaint about Progressive Credit Limited (Our ref:XXXXXXXX )
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 19:09:25 +0000
From: FOS
To: Niddy

Dear Mr Niddy

I have asked Opus to confirm whether or not it will increase the amount awarded for distress and inconvenience based on the additional problems you have had. I will let you know the outcome as soon as Opus responds.

We will just have to hope that it comes back with an additional offer that is acceptable to you together with an explanation of why the default was registered in the first place.

Yours sincerely,

Adjudicator

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

Isn't it obvious why the Oplus collections department reinstated the default markers?

They did that because they could do that.

[swanfan]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

They did it coz they're incompetent.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Niddy vs Opus (ex CitiCard)

Isn't it obvious why the Oplus collections department reinstated the default markers?

They did that because they could do that.

Shame, now it's gonna cost em a good £250 - £500