Contractor credit check - FSA requirement?

[MarillionFan]

I've just had one of these checks. It took two weeks, was unbelievably intrusive and frankly pissed me right off

[Menelaus]

Yep.

The key to these checks is to be able to show that you're able to be upfront about past misdeeds. It's similar to DV / SC (security clearance) - the people doing the vetting don't care about your past misdeeds, it's that you own up to it that they want to check.

As for it being an FSA requirement - that's open to question. It is true to say that in the FSA handbook under section FIT2.3 there's a section that makes reference to the existence of judgments but - and here's the kicker - that's only for people acting in a controlled capacity (e.g., directors, MLRO, compliance, Lloyds names etc).

I suspect that this is most likely about avoiding reputational risk than anything else. The risk of someone work on a scoring project having access to any cash never mind the till of a branch is nil in an investment banking place but they still consider it to be a big deal to be able to show that you're not a risk to the bank through having debts that you might be able to be blackmailed into revealing banks' secrets as a consequence of.

It's all complete BS, and I look forward to finally getting out of banking!

[HairyArsedBloke]

Just read this from the Telegraph: Bad debts hit record high

This is the stuff they have written off (actually sold off to collection companies). Just how many individuals does this represent and what is to come?

The point is, these are people that are now excluded from large areas of the work place. Many with good skills, but employers will not hire them.

These same employers will then go on to complain that they cannot find the staff in the UK and need to import them.

The thing is, many of the people who go into financial difficulty did so as a result of earlier rounds of displacement by imported workers.

[dspsyssts]

Didn't want to risk it in the end and withdrew my application ensuring they didn't send anything to Kroll.

I have worked hard enough to ensure there is no linking me back to the past previous unpleasantness, and don't want to risk mucking that up for the sake of a contract.

Seems if your contract is with a financial institution they will credit check though not always!...if your contract is with a manufacturing company etc its unlikely they will.

With a bit of skill it is reasonably easy to dump your past...

[Menelaus]

Just read this from the Telegraph: Bad debts hit record high

This is the stuff they have written off (actually sold off to collection companies). Just how many individuals does this represent and what is to come?

The point is, these are people that are now excluded from large areas of the work place. Many with good skills, but employers will not hire them.

These same employers will then go on to complain that they cannot find the staff in the UK and need to import them.

The thing is, many of the people who go into financial difficulty did so as a result of earlier rounds of displacement by imported workers.

Sorry for the delay in replying to this post HAB.

The question of write-off is one that's come into sharper focus as a consequence of the establishment of the Asset Protection Agency, a quango of HM Treasury to provide a guarantor behind some highly dubious RBS assets.

We need to get into a position where the guidance of the FSA (note, the relevant section of the FIT component is guidance, not regulation) is taken a little more pragmatically.

For example, RBS will accept someone if they've a satisfied CCJ for <£500 that is >24months old (or so I believe).

[Fat Dave]

[QUOTE=dspsyssts;1086389]I have worked hard enough to ensure there is no linking me back to the past previous unpleasantness,

Keep away from Experian then, and probably all others of their ilk. They share all the information they get.

[lje]

Keep away from Experian then, and probably all others of their ilk. They share all the information they get.

Of course they do! That's their business. They sell information.

[ASB]

Sorry for the delay in replying to this post HAB.

The question of write-off is one that's come into sharper focus as a consequence of the establishment of the Asset Protection Agency, a quango of HM Treasury to provide a guarantor behind some highly dubious RBS assets.

We need to get into a position where the guidance of the FSA (note, the relevant section of the FIT component is guidance, not regulation) is taken a little more pragmatically.

For example, RBS will accept someone if they've a satisfied CCJ for <£500 that is >24months old (or so I believe).

A concern I have with the whole CCJ and credit record in general (and it's particularly sensitive in banking) is that it seems to be saying "you cant have a legitimate dispute".

e.g. I employ a build who does a crap job. So I refuse to pay until he puts it right. We are now simply at the point of a legitimate dispute. However he decides to go the court route maintaining it's to standard.

We turn up in court. He happens to win, I shrug my shoulders put it down to experience and pay up when the judgement comes. So I'm now at the least state of noted as a risk (don't know if this would end up as a CCJ but it would definitely be recorded). It's not right.

[Menelaus]

A concern I have with the whole CCJ and credit record in general (and it's particularly sensitive in banking) is that it seems to be saying "you cant have a legitimate dispute".

e.g. I employ a build who does a crap job. So I refuse to pay until he puts it right. We are now simply at the point of a legitimate dispute. However he decides to go the court route maintaining it's to standard.

We turn up in court. He happens to win, I shrug my shoulders put it down to experience and pay up when the judgement comes. So I'm now at the least state of noted as a risk (don't know if this would end up as a CCJ but it would definitely be recorded). It's not right.

There's a way of having it removed. If it's satisfied within 30 days of judgment being entered against you, the data can be removed.

Experian (together with Equifax and CallCredit) don't get their records from the courts, they get it from a company called Registry Trust Ltd (here) who have a section on removal of judgments so that they don't appear on your credit file.

It should also be noted, however (and here's the kicker) - I'm currently looking at a file where the existence of CCJ isn't a predictor of risk. In fact, counter intuitively, having a CCJ seems to be representative of the borrower being a better risk. Shocking, eh?

[Sailaway]

When banks do a credit check are they just concerned with CCJ's or are they also concerned with late payments ?