2004 - Complaint Case Note 15

View printable version of this page

Case Citation: B v Credit Provider [2004] PrivCmrA 15

Subject Heading: Payment default improperly listed on consumer credit file

Law: Section 18E(1)(b)(vi)(A) of the Privacy Act 1988.

Facts:

A credit provider listed a payment default for a specified amount on the complainant's consumer credit information file. The complainant alleged that they had never been 60 days overdue and that they had been denied credit because of the payment default and sought removal of the payment default and compensation.

Issues:

Section 18E(1)(b)(vi)(A) states that a credit reporting agency must not include personal information in an individual's consumer credit information file unless, amongst other things, the information is a record of credit provided by a credit provider to an individual, being credit in respect of which the individual is at least 60 days overdue in making a payment, including a payment that is wholly or partly a payment of interest.

The investigation focussed on establishing if any payment had been 60 days overdue. The Office asked the credit provider for details of payments due and received and also asked the credit provider to comment on copies of bank statements submitted by the complainant that suggested that payment was not 60 days overdue.

It became apparent that payments had been made from a business cheque account and that the credit provider had received the payments but initially could not establish for which account they were intended. Once the payments were identified the credit provider applied these to the complainant's credit card account and removed the payment default from the individual's consumer credit information file.

Outcome:

After investigation the credit provider removed the payment default since the complainant had not been 60 days overdue. The Office put the view to the complainant that their failure to properly identify their payments contributed to the problem. The Office advised that in the circumstances it considered the removal of the default listing as an adequate response to the matter. The complainant did not pursue the issue of compensation.

Under section 41(2)(a) of the Act, the Commissioner may decide not to investigate further an act or practice about which a complaint has been made if the Commissioner is satisfied that the respondent has dealt adequately with the complaint.

The Commissioner was of the view that by removing the payment default the credit provider had adequately dealt with the complaint. The complaint was closed on this basis.

OFFICE OF THE PRIVACY COMMISSIONER
June 2004