TTC v Very

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

Data that is reported on your credit file must be fair, accurate,

consistent, complete and up to date.




Lenders that supply data to the CRAs are required to ensure that the data is accurate, up to

date and meets agreed quality standards.

















Usual Reply;-

Thanks for your emails. Unfortunately we’re unable to remove anything from your credit report without receiving evidence or authorisation that we should do so.

In this case I can see that we’ve dispute the information and the lender has advised that you’ve contacted them regarding this and if you have a further dispute regarding the default date you’ll need to contact them directly to discuss this further.

As we’ve mentioned before If the response you get from them isn’t to your satisfaction then it may be worthwhile contacting the Financial Ombudsman to see if they can help. This link will take you directly to their web page which details how to go about resolving a dispute with a financial organisation - http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...complaints.htm.

25/09/2014 - letter from noddle states Capquest refuse to correct default entry date again, or as stated "Cannot be Removed",the disputed entry will be visible from now on,


after all the CONC * rules quoted in respect of altered default dates by a DCA/Purchaser and notification account in dispute!

leave for a couple of days and send complaint via their system again again as before.

after original call to them stating Account in dispute also payment not showing and the operator (Man) stated will look into it, I did state no furter payments until the two previous payments show, also I sent spreadsheet showing default/telecall charges etc

[SaltnVinegar]

Re: TTC v Very

If you are not: xxx xxxx xxxxxx or if you do not wish to be contacted by e-mail then please reply to this e-mail with “INCORRECT e-mail” or “NO CONSENT TO e-mail” in the subject header.

If you respond as per the "NO CONSENT" option then you are doing Capquests tracing job for them and verifying that the details they have are probably accurate, and to which they will then probably ignore your request, or label you a 'won't pay'.

I would almost always suggest (unless a shared email address), that emails from creditors are best ignored. They cannot verify that the recipient is the debtor in question, they cannot verify that the email has been received, never mind read, and because it costs them more, and slows the process down, its always better to get them onto snail mail.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very


Original e-mail sent to my IP:-

We are looking to contact you in regards to a personal matter that has been transferred to Capquest. Please contact our customer service department on 03339997218 - (Your operators standard charges apply), at your earliest convenience. Our call centre is open 8am to 9pm Monday to Thursday, 8am to 7pm Fridays and 9am to 2pm on Saturdays.

Alternatively please reply to this e-mail with a contact number and the best time to call you, and one of our customer service representatives will be in touch.

If you are not: xxx xxxx xxxxxx or if you do not wish to be contacted by e-mail then please reply to this e-mail with “INCORRECT e-mail” or “NO CONSENT TO e-mail” in the subject header.

We look forward to hearing from you.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

Data that is reported on your credit file must be fair, accurate,

consistent, complete and up to date.




Lenders that supply data to the CRAs are required to ensure that the data is accurate, up to

date and meets agreed quality standards.

: correction of entries in credit reference agency files

CONC 9.2.1
01/04/2014

FCA

Within 10 working days after any of the following events1) the credit reference agency giving notice under section 159(2) of the CCA that it has removed an entry from the file kept by it about an individual or has amended such an entry (including where it has amended an entry by removing information from it); or
(2) the credit reference agency giving notice under section 159(4) of the CCA that it has received a notice under section 159(3) requiring it to add a notice of correction to the file and intends to comply with the notice; or
(3) the expiry of the period specified in an order of the FCA or the Information Commissioner under section 159(5) of the CCA as the period within which the order is to be complied with;
the credit reference agency must give notice of the particulars specified in CONC 9.2.2 R to eachperson to whom at any time since the relevant date it has furnished information relevant to the financial standing of the individual concerned.

[Note: regulation 5 of SI 1977/330]

CONC 9.2.2
01/04/2014

FCA

The particulars referred to in CONC 9.2.1 R are1) in relation to information included in any entry which has been removed or amended or which is referred to in a notice of correctiona) particulars of any entry which has been removed from the file and a statement that it has been removed;
(b) particulars of any entry which has been amended and of the amendment, or of the entry as amended; and
(c) particulars of the entry, together with a copy of the notice of correction; and

(2) where the information did not include the entry which has been removed or amended or which is referred to in a notice of correction, but which (whether in the form of a rating or opinion or otherwise) was based in whole or in part on any such entry and has been, or falls to be, modified by reason of the removal, amendment or noticea) particulars of the modified information; and
(b) a statement that the information has been modified by reason of the removal, amendment or notice, as the case may be.



CONC 9.2.3
01/04/2014

FCA

In this section, "the relevant date" means the date one month immediately preceding the receipt by the credit reference agency from the individual of the request, particulars and fee referred to in section 158(1) of the CCA, or the request and fee (if a fee is payable) referred to in section 7(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998 and, if applicable, the receipt of any further information requested by the credit reference agency referred to in section 7(3) of that Act.

Sent Noddle the above quote via e-mail to-day. they might get fed up and insist accurate info from Capquest on default date and the removal of the incorrect default date/their take over date. also that they know account in dispute from evidence/admission by Shop direct e-mails.

Usual Reply;-

Thanks for your emails. Unfortunately we’re unable to remove anything from your credit report without receiving evidence or authorisation that we should do so.

In this case I can see that we’ve dispute the information and the lender has advised that you’ve contacted them regarding this and if you have a further dispute regarding the default date you’ll need to contact them directly to discuss this further.

As we’ve mentioned before If the response you get from them isn’t to your satisfaction then it may be worthwhile contacting the Financial Ombudsman to see if they can help. This link will take you directly to their web page which details how to go about resolving a dispute with a financial organisation - http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...complaints.htm.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

: correction of entries in credit reference agency files

CONC 9.2.1
01/04/2014

FCA

Within 10 working days after any of the following events1) the credit reference agency giving notice under section 159(2) of the CCA that it has removed an entry from the file kept by it about an individual or has amended such an entry (including where it has amended an entry by removing information from it); or
(2) the credit reference agency giving notice under section 159(4) of the CCA that it has received a notice under section 159(3) requiring it to add a notice of correction to the file and intends to comply with the notice; or
(3) the expiry of the period specified in an order of the FCA or the Information Commissioner under section 159(5) of the CCA as the period within which the order is to be complied with;
the credit reference agency must give notice of the particulars specified in CONC 9.2.2 R to eachperson to whom at any time since the relevant date it has furnished information relevant to the financial standing of the individual concerned.

[Note: regulation 5 of SI 1977/330]

CONC 9.2.2
01/04/2014

FCA

The particulars referred to in CONC 9.2.1 R are1) in relation to information included in any entry which has been removed or amended or which is referred to in a notice of correctiona) particulars of any entry which has been removed from the file and a statement that it has been removed;
(b) particulars of any entry which has been amended and of the amendment, or of the entry as amended; and
(c) particulars of the entry, together with a copy of the notice of correction; and

(2) where the information did not include the entry which has been removed or amended or which is referred to in a notice of correction, but which (whether in the form of a rating or opinion or otherwise) was based in whole or in part on any such entry and has been, or falls to be, modified by reason of the removal, amendment or noticea) particulars of the modified information; and
(b) a statement that the information has been modified by reason of the removal, amendment or notice, as the case may be.



CONC 9.2.3
01/04/2014

FCA

In this section, "the relevant date" means the date one month immediately preceding the receipt by the credit reference agency from the individual of the request, particulars and fee referred to in section 158(1) of the CCA, or the request and fee (if a fee is payable) referred to in section 7(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998 and, if applicable, the receipt of any further information requested by the credit reference agency referred to in section 7(3) of that Act.

Sent Noddle the above quote via e-mail to-day. they might get fed up and insist accurate info from Capquest on default date and the removal of the incorrect default date/their take over date. also that they know account in dispute from evidence/admission by Shop direct e-mails.

[Pixie]

Re: TTC v Very

Sorry TTC. Never had an account with Very. CapQuest have had a few of my accounts in the past (when they were under the old management) and currently have one account but I haven't heard from them for months.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

13/08/2014 - E.Mail to Capquest sent to-day:-

The Default which you have added to my file are a breach of the data protection act for the following reasons:-


1.a. You have altered the original Default date which is against FCA(BCOB) rule and have refused Call credits request to correct.
2..a. As notified to you 2 payments missing from Shop Direct within your figures>?

1. All data must be accurate and up to date.
2. You must carry over the original default date if you have purchased an outstanding account from another company
3. You are only able to up date my credit file if Shop Direct had removed their original default from my credit file (thus treating it as a continuation the an original account, but this is not the case)
4. You have effectively added the default by which would impair my credit score for a six years.

No response what so ever from Capquest since my e-mails yet they have refused to correct the default date which very originally applied and just left it to their so called purchase date, Noddle state they refuse to alter dates,

Capquest also have not responded to original Telecom to them when I informed them account in dispute also 2 payments missing from shop direct submitted it seems during selling off, also sent copies of a statement of refund in/out of account by shop direct, also an e-mail shop direct state sorry for selling whilst in dispute but contact capquest the purchasers who will sort it out?

anybody had dealing with this crowd??

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

Response for the 3rd time from call credit (Noddle)


Thanks for your email. I can completely understand how frustrating this must be for you and I can only apologise that I’m not in a position to assist you any further.

The data held by Callcredit is supplied by financial organisations, local authorities, courts and insolvency services. Callcredit then pull it all together to create your credit file.

As a data controller Callcredit are required under the Data Protection Act to query anything that we’re informed may be incorrect and we do this via our online dispute process.
On this occasion we have queried the data with the organisation that supplied it and they haven’t authorised any changes. Without authorisation from the supplier we cannot make any changes to the data we hold. If we were to make any changes to our database they would be overwritten the next time the lender sends us information.

The next step is to get in touch with the lender directly to find out why they believe the data they are sharing is accurate. If the response you get from them isn’t to your satisfaction then it may be worthwhile contacting the Financial Ombudsman to see if they can help. This link will take you directly to their web page which details how to go about resolving a dispute with a financial organisation - http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...complaints.htm.

I hope this helps you make some progress toward resolving your dispute.

Well it looks to me that Capquest are using a default/purchase and changing the default date from the originator to the date they bought it and recording non payments monthly on Noddle /Others?, yet in my case they know the account is in dispute with originator, it is just another dirty trick to get you to pay no doubt, it is time Regulators withdrew the criminal operations of these so called debt buyers, even Judge Jeffries got hung in the end for his crimes against the states people = Stone Gallows.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

I'll check through your emails etc tomorrow matey - too complex for me just now (head mashed).....

The e-mails are Capital One thread i.4. THE TECH CLERKS - CAPITAL ONE = LOWELLS NOW

10-08-2014 - Copy of the alledged agreement sent to Ni

10-08-2014 - Copy of the alledged agreement sent to Niddy

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

Response for the 3rd time from call credit (Noddle)


Thanks for your email. I can completely understand how frustrating this must be for you and I can only apologise that I’m not in a position to assist you any further.

The data held by Callcredit is supplied by financial organisations, local authorities, courts and insolvency services. Callcredit then pull it all together to create your credit file.

As a data controller Callcredit are required under the Data Protection Act to query anything that we’re informed may be incorrect and we do this via our online dispute process.
On this occasion we have queried the data with the organisation that supplied it and they haven’t authorised any changes. Without authorisation from the supplier we cannot make any changes to the data we hold. If we were to make any changes to our database they would be overwritten the next time the lender sends us information.

The next step is to get in touch with the lender directly to find out why they believe the data they are sharing is accurate. If the response you get from them isn’t to your satisfaction then it may be worthwhile contacting the Financial Ombudsman to see if they can help. This link will take you directly to their web page which details how to go about resolving a dispute with a financial organisation - http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...complaints.htm.

I hope this helps you make some progress toward resolving your dispute.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

No Prob mate!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: TTC v Very

I'll check through your emails etc tomorrow matey - too complex for me just now (head mashed).....

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

spoke to Capquest and they are contacting Very for details of dispute and I sent Very E-Mails to me stating that they are sorry about selling in dispute but cannot do anything so contact capquest.

also informed capquest that their are two payments not recorded on either companies payments site and sent in e-mail copies of other payments by shop direct in & out of the one statement, which looked like they were going to refund charges then changed their mind.

also sent copy of e-mail from Very stating sorry sold in dispute but contact new owner as they will help?

Result = Nothing heard since so see if the e-mail sent to-day jollies them up. as the figure regarding charges brings it well below £750.00, they Capquest have recorded no payments for 2 months on Noddle CRA file.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very





13/08/2014 - E.Mail to Capquest sent to-day:-

The Default which you have added to my file are a breach of the data protection act for the following reasons:-


1.a. You have altered the original Default date which is against FCA(BCOB) rule and have refused Call credits request to correct.
2..a. As notified to you 2 payments missing from Shop Direct within your figures>?

1. All data must be accurate and up to date.
2. You must carry over the original default date if you have purchased an outstanding account from another company
3. You are only able to up date my credit file if Shop Direct had removed their original default from my credit file (thus treating it as a continuation the an original account, but this is not the case)
4. You have effectively added the default by which would impair my credit score for a six years.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: TTC v Very

well it seems Capquest refuse to alter the default date which they put on early July this year, the default shows the date they bought the debt yet Very (Shop Direct) entered it last year, Noddle (Call credit) state Capquest will not amend to the correct date. after requesting to them twice.

Also the 2 payments not showing on Shop Direct site I informed Capquest about do not show by either company.