Experian Limited · DRN-6053066

The complaint Mr C complains Experian Limited is reporting incorrect information on his credit file. What happened Mr C held a loan with a bank I’ll refer to as I, which was opened in June 2021, but was later defaulted, in August 2022. In January 2025 the account was sold to a third-party debt collector, I’ll refer to as L. Mr C then became aware his credit score had dropped and said this was because both I and L were reporting the defaulted account on his credit file, so he contacted Experian. Experian raised disputes with I and L, but neither gave it permission to update or remove the entries. L also asked that Mr C contact it directly. As a result, Experian said it was unable to do anything further. As Mr C remained unhappy, he complained. Experian reviewed matters but didn’t think it had acted unfairly. It said without the consent of the data owners it was unable to remove or update the entries. It also explained Mr C could add a Notice of Correction (NOC), which he ultimately did. Mr C didn’t consider this resolved matters, saying his credit score had dropped when the account with L was added to his credit file. He also said by adding a NOC Experian had accepted in was a duplicate account and should remove it. As such, he brought the complaint to this Service, asking for the duplicate account to be removed and payment of £500 compensation for the distress and inconvenience he’d been caused. An Investigator here reviewed everything but didn’t think Experian had acted unfairly. They said Experian raised disputes, as they’d expect, but as it wasn’t given consent to remove or update the entries there wasn’t anything further Experian could reasonably do. Mr C didn’t agree and in summary said the duplicate reporting was misleading and breached the Data Protection Act 2018. He also considered Experian had a duty to ensure data is accurate and he’d been caused significant harm by his credit score dropping. Mr C also said he’d not been sent a Notice of Assignment by L, which he considered breached several rules and regulations. As no agreement could be reached, the complaint has been passed to me to decide. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. In doing so, I’ve taken into account the relevant industry rules and guidance, and what would be considered as good industry practice. I should explain, within this decision I can only consider the actions of Experian, not those of

-- 1 of 3 --

I or L. Mr C has also said he didn’t receive a Notice of Assignment from L, but that isn’t something I can consider against Experian. As our Investigator explained, if Mr C would like to complain about that, he’ll need to contact L in the first instance. Information on Mr C’s credit file Experian don’t own the data it reports on - the data is owned by lenders, third party companies and other organisations. The responsibility of reporting accurate and up to date information therefore rests mainly in the hands of the data providers. CRAs, such as Experian, don’t actively approach data providers for information, rather they are sent to the CRA in a data package for it to report. The CRA then reports whatever information it has been given. Not owning the data also means Experian isn’t generally responsible for the data provided, but it must take reasonable steps to ensure it is accurate and investigate when a dispute is raised. Experian did that here and raised disputes with I and L when Mr C raised concerns about the accounts. Experian received responses from I and L, which I can see it shared with Mr C, as I’d expect. Neither I or L gave Experian consent to update or remove the accounts, which meant Experian wasn’t able to do anything further. As a result, I don’t think Experian acted unfairly in not removing or amending the accounts. I can however see Experian offered to add a NOC to Mr C’s credit file, which seems reasonable. This doesn’t however mean Experian accepts the accounts as duplicates, in the way Mr C says, and as such should take further actions. It’s simply a way of adding further commentary to Mr C’s credit file about the accounts. I wouldn’t expect Experian to investigate the validity of data, or update it, before reporting on it, to the extent Mr C has said. That’s because, as long as sufficient information matches the information Experian is reporting on, as was the case here, I wouldn’t expect it to carry out a more detailed review as Experian wouldn’t have access to the information necessary to do so. So I can’t agree Experian has acted unfairly in not doing so, because it doesn’t own the data and must follow the directions of the data owners – as it did here. Impact on Mr C Mr C is concerned about the impact this information will have on future lending decisions and that his credit score has reduced. He’s also said Experian should pay £500 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. In order to uphold this aspect of Mr C’s complaint, I’d need to be satisfied an error solely made by Experian caused a loss. Firstly, it doesn’t appear Mr C has been caused a loss at this stage – rather he’s concerned about possible future loss. But in any case, as I’ve not found Experian has made an error here, I won’t be asking it to make changes in the way Mr C has asked, or pay compensation. In addition, it might be helpful to explain, a credit score is simply a numerical figure that can be used to give some general comprehension of whether a credit record is in a good place, or not. The score will fluctuate regularly, based on various factors, including among other things, the balance held on credit accounts when the score is generated, or the amount of available credit being used. Lenders don’t see this score – it’s simply an indication of how a potential lender may view an individual’s credit rating, rather than a formal assessment. Instead, lenders use data from CRAs, such as Experian, along with information the applicant has provided to assess a credit application, using their own systems.

-- 2 of 3 --

As such, Mr C’s credit score itself in isolation wouldn’t impact any potential applications. And while the situation is no doubt frustrating for Mr C – it might help to look at the score as the CRA’s view rather than something which is set in stone. For completeness, I can see Mr C has also referred to other decisions issued by this Service. Firstly, I should say having looked at the references provided, these don’t appear to relate to complaints about CRA’s. But in any case, I must look at every case individually and on its own merit and having done that here, I don’t think Experian has acted unfairly. Overall, I can appreciate this will come as a disappointment to Mr C, but based on everything I’ve seen, I can’t agree Experian has acted unfairly. It did what I’d expect and raised disputes with I and L, but it wasn’t given consent to update or remove the accounts – which it needed. It also added a NOC which seems reasonable. Taking everything into account, I won’t be asking Experian to do anything here. My final decision For the reasons explained above, I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr C to accept or reject my decision before 24 April 2026. Victoria Cheyne Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --