[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 28 Nov 2007, at 11:34, Tom Potts wrote: > On Wednesday 28 November 2007 10:51, Andy Smith wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 09:05:02AM +0000, Tom Potts wrote: >>> On Wednesday 28 November 2007 08:47, Henry Bremridge wrote: >>>> I believe under the Freedom of Information Act, people are >>>> allowed to >>>> set a reasonable charge for providing the data. In the case of the >>>> credit agencies this has been set at £2 >>> >>> This really ought to be challenged somehow. This is the key part >>> of their >>> business (doing the check) and if it much more complicated than >>> select ..../print/post (ie about 50p) then we are being penalised >>> by the >>> companies incompetence. >> >> It's a free market, anyone who thinks they can run a profitable >> credit >> reporting agency and process access requests at 50p a go can feel >> free to try. Is there such a massive difference between 50p/year >> and £2/year? >> >>> What I find disgusting is that these companies make money out of MY >>> information >> >> ...that is publically available or that they pay for... >> >>> and expect me to pay to have it checked. >> >> You would rather that you had no opportunity to correct mistakes made >> by the companies that feed data to the credit clearing houses then? >> >>> I shouldn't have to subsidise their attempt to save money and >>> increase their profits. >> >> You don't have to. Just don't bother using any form of credit. But >> if you do, you are getting a better deal because the creditor is >> more able to tell that you're not going to default. >> >>> Its a bit like those old 'gene' patents >> >> No it isn't. >> >>> Some say £2 isnt much - well give me 50p for everyone in this >>> country with a bank account for ... well nothing , and I'll send >>> you a postcard from a nice beach! >> >> Not everyone in this country asks for their credit reports nor uses >> credit. If you or anyone else feels it is easy money you can set up >> your own credit scoring service. I'm really finding it hard to >> understand your problem with these companies; they provide a >> valuable service to both creditor and debtor and their operating >> costs are not zero. >> >> If you want to rail against injustice try any of the number of >> abusive creditors who are quite happy to sell credit they know the >> debtor can't afford with punishing terms that can leave people >> without a home or bank account paying cash weekly on the doorstep >> for hire purchase of the clothes on their back. Look at every >> company that says "loan with NO CREDIT CHECK" and observe how seedy >> they are. >> >>> Hey I have a car and can use it to make a profit but I don't have >>> to have pay for any damage I cause with it?????? >> >> Doesn't make sense. What's your point? > > I don't use credit as such* but I can it can still be upset by > these things. A > bad credit mark can prevent my debit card being renewed-!! > > *I cant get things on account - so when I have lots of small items > purchased > regularly in a local shop neither they nor I can benefit from the cost > savings of having them on account. OK they would grant me account > rights as > I've never failed to pay but theres their expenses and the > inevitable loss of > trust. > > > What I'm saying is they are providing a service to other people > that can > seriously screw MY life up and I have to pay to fix THEIR errors - > or even to > find out if thats where the problem might be. > I don't care how 'reasonably priced' it may be its still wrong. > Tom te tom te tom > I agree with Tom, it's not as if the credit giving companies are > making massive losses, and where they are (mortgage debacle) then > that's their own fault and a risk of trading. These bodies, banks, > insurance companies etc. all seem to think > we should pay for their mistakes. > Clare -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html