Joint-consumer response to the Credit Reporting Code

The CCLC recently submitted a 43-page consumer response to the proposed Credit Reporting Code written by CCLC staff, Carolyn Bond (formerly of Consumer Action Legal Centre) and Nigel Waters of the Australian Privacy Foundation.  Several other consumer advocacy groups have signed on to the submission including: Consumer Action Legal Centre, Australian Privacy Foundation, Consumer Credit Legal Service WA, Financial Counsellors of Australia, and the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network.  We had many concerns regarding the proposed code including its accessibility and readability for consumers.  The Joint submission made many recommendations for changes to the proposed code.

Major Recommendations:

1. The CR Code must make it clear that Repayment History Information (RHI) can only be reported by credit providers licensed under the National Consumer Credit Protection Act and mortgage insurers
2. The CR Code should include a commitment to fairness.
3. Default listings must be removed immediately once the debt has become statute barred.
4. The OAIC/Government is strongly encouraged to consult with stakeholders on the ongoing problems with credit repair companies with a view to consider further regulation.
5. The CR Code should specifically require that all existing listings under $150 are removed on commencement of the Privacy Act.
6. The CR Code must specifically ban:
   • Multiple default listings in relation to one debt
   • Listing a default again after a debt is assigned
   • Updating the amount of the debt on the default listing
7. The CR Code must clarify and acknowledge that CP’s are subject to a range of regulatory requirements, including other legislation and Codes of Practice/Industry Codes and these continue to apply including when they impose a higher standard than the CR Code on a particular issue. The CR Code will identify where the Privacy Act sets certain legislative time limits.
8. If account numbers are going to be used this information can only be disclosed in specified circumstances, for example, to the relevant CP and to the individual but to no other party.
9. Clause 5.1 of the CR Code needs to clarify what administrative information can be disclosed, including in respect of ‘identifiers’ and the Code should expressly discourage the standardisation of account numbers across the credit industry.
10. The CR Code should state that the notice of an intention to list a default must be issued between 30 days and 14 days before the default is listed.
11. The amount of the default as notified to the consumer must be the amount listed on the credit report.
12. The code should provide that consumers have the right to fully complete the application process for a free report online.
13. The CR Code should specifically state that ALL CPs must be a member of an approved dispute resolution scheme that is free for consumers.
14. The grace period before default should be extended from 5 days to 14 days.
15. The CR Code should be monitored by an independent CR Code Compliance Committee, not audited by CRBs, who will have a conflict of interest.