Mistakes can happen in credit data collection and they sometimes go on record uncorrected. The following case studies from recent annual reports of the Data Protection Commissioner and the Ombudsman for Credit Institutions show how important it is to check your own record and pursue the matter if you have grounds for a complaint.

Incompatible disclosure - "close matches", Data Protection Commissioner Annual Report 2000: An individual made an access request to the Irish Credit Bureau (ICB) to see his credit record. On receiving the information, he noticed that a number of financial institutions, with which he had never had any dealings, had viewed his credit record. The individual was concerned that his private financial affairs had been disclosed in contravention of the Data Protection Act.

In the course of its investigations into this matter, the Commissioner's Office established that the financial institutions involved had made a credit check relating to another individual who shared a similar (but not identical) name and similar (not identical) address. The ICB had returned information relating to the complainant, on the basis that his details were a "close match" to those supplied by the financial institutions.

Inaccurate credit rating, Data Protection Commissioner Annual Report 1999: The complainants in this case were refused a loan from two financial institutions. They made an access request under the Data Protection Act to a credit bureau to see their credit records. The records indicated that they had in the past taken out three loans with a third financial institution.

While the two most recent loans were shown as having been paid off, the first loan (which had been taken out about six years previously) still appeared to be outstanding as it did not have a reference code to show that it had been paid. In fact, all three loans had been repaid on time. The institution in question said that, "due to an administrative error", a return had not been sent by the institution to the credit bureau when the loan had been settled.

Record not amended for two- and-a-half years, Ombudsman for Credit Institutions Annual Report 2000: A couple who fell into arrears on a loan account had a judgment registered against them by the loan provider. The fact of this judgment was duly recorded on the ICB records.

The complainants subsequently satisfied the amount in full but the bureau's record had never been amended to reflect this, and the credit rating of the customers was adversely affect for a period of two-and-a-half years.

When the complainants contacted the lender they found that they were, as they put it, "sent from Billy to Jack" in their efforts to have the matter resolved.

The Ombudsman found the complainants' credit rating had been adversely affected during the period due to the dilatory action of the lender and awarded £2,000 (€2,540) compensation.