Tweet
This is on behalf of someone else, and appears strange to me.
Credit file was requested and Santander had logged an alias - using maiden name, but married title. The person hasnt used their maiden name for nearly 40 years. Sent letter off to Sant. and get the following response.
"The recording of previous names is of benefit to consumers and to lenders, as by having other naem information on file it may assist in the identification of the applicant, and also where a credit history in a former name exists that information may assist the outcome of an application. Therefore, accurate alias information is retained indefinately on your credit file as it remains relevant and useful information."
No application (knowingly) has been made in this name, Mrs X X as opposed to Miss X X. As the surname has not been used for such a length of time, then I cant see how it helps to identify the applicant, further, there is no previous history with this name and title. While I can appreciate the last sentence, as no credit has been applied for with Mrs (maiden name), surely it can be removed?
"As the alias on your credit file relates to your maiden name, there is no reason from your point of view as a consumer or ours as a lender for it to be removed, nor any benefit. Its mere presence would not have an adverse effect on any future applications you may make."
I can see one good point to make - it could (potentially) show a possible attempt of fraud or account takeover etc etc. It's presence could well have an effect, as it potentiailly shows an application for credit in a diffferent name - so possibly the hiding of a previous bad history. They have also refused to remove the information.
It may be being a bit OTT here, but surely this cannot be fully correct? Would every married woman in the country have the same problem (though it should be Miss X X and not Mrs X Y) - presumably it IS the case, then to pick on say, Joan Collins (and assuming she was not famous) then her file would state also known as U, also known as V also known as ...... assume you get the picture!
Credit file was requested and Santander had logged an alias - using maiden name, but married title. The person hasnt used their maiden name for nearly 40 years. Sent letter off to Sant. and get the following response.
"The recording of previous names is of benefit to consumers and to lenders, as by having other naem information on file it may assist in the identification of the applicant, and also where a credit history in a former name exists that information may assist the outcome of an application. Therefore, accurate alias information is retained indefinately on your credit file as it remains relevant and useful information."
No application (knowingly) has been made in this name, Mrs X X as opposed to Miss X X. As the surname has not been used for such a length of time, then I cant see how it helps to identify the applicant, further, there is no previous history with this name and title. While I can appreciate the last sentence, as no credit has been applied for with Mrs (maiden name), surely it can be removed?
"As the alias on your credit file relates to your maiden name, there is no reason from your point of view as a consumer or ours as a lender for it to be removed, nor any benefit. Its mere presence would not have an adverse effect on any future applications you may make."
I can see one good point to make - it could (potentially) show a possible attempt of fraud or account takeover etc etc. It's presence could well have an effect, as it potentiailly shows an application for credit in a diffferent name - so possibly the hiding of a previous bad history. They have also refused to remove the information.
It may be being a bit OTT here, but surely this cannot be fully correct? Would every married woman in the country have the same problem (though it should be Miss X X and not Mrs X Y) - presumably it IS the case, then to pick on say, Joan Collins (and assuming she was not famous) then her file would state also known as U, also known as V also known as ...... assume you get the picture!
Comment