2008 - Complaint Case Note 8

View printable version of this page

Case Citation:

H v Credit Reporting Agency [2008] PrivCmrA 8

Subject Heading:

Accuracy of credit information file

Law:

Section 18G(a) of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)

Facts:

The complainant’s credit information file was cross referenced to a third party by the credit reporting agency.

The complainant alleged that the credit reporting agency failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that his credit information file was accurate, up-to-date, complete and not misleading, by placing a cross reference on the complainant’s credit information file to a third party.

Issues:

Section 18G(a) of the Privacy Act states that a credit provider or a credit reporting agency in possession or control of a credit information file or credit report must take reasonable steps to ensure that personal information contained in the file or report is accurate, up-to-date, complete and not misleading.

Outcome:

The Privacy Commissioner opened a formal investigation under section 40(1) of the Privacy Act.

During the course of the investigation, the credit reporting agency advised that its credit provider subscriber had requested that the complainant’s credit information file be cross referenced to the third party. However, the credit reporting agency was unable to provide details regarding why a cross reference had been added to the complainant’s credit information file.

The Commissioner was of the opinion that by failing to record the reason why the cross reference occurred, the credit reporting agency had failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that the personal information contained in the complainant’s credit information file was accurate, up-to-date, complete and not misleading in accordance with section 18G(a).

The credit reporting agency advised that the absence of a notation on the complainant’s credit information file only indicated that it did not retain sufficient documentary evidence to support the actions taken at the time. Notwithstanding this, the credit reporting agency removed the cross reference from the complainant’s credit information file.

The credit reporting agency advised the Commissioner that it has since changed its processes with regards to the cross referencing of credit information files.

The credit reporting agency also advised it is taking reasonable steps to make a notation when a subscriber requests that credit information files be cross referenced so that the credit reporting agency will be able to provide details regarding why a cross reference has been added to an individual’s credit information file.

Section 41(2)(a) of the Privacy Act gives the Commissioner a discretion not to investigate, or 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 matters that gave rise to the complaint.

In this case, the complainant was satisfied with the outcome and the Commissioner closed the complaint under section 41(2)(a) of the Privacy Act on the basis that the credit reporting agency had adequately dealt with the complaint.

OFFICE OF THE PRIVACY COMMISSIONER

June 2008