A WARNING TO ALL TRADERS WHO USE THIS SITE

[ninebob]

They do as far as BT are concerned

Not in terms of your credit score.

However, obviously if there was a debt to BT from the previous occupant, BT will ask for proof that you are in fact "ban-all-sheds" and not "dodgy-bloke-who-used-to-live-in-ban-all-sheds-house-and-owes-us-money"! Normally any proof of address with your name on it will do. Otherwise anyone could run up a phone bill and then ring BT claiming to be a new occupant.

This only occurs when the debt is recent. If the debt is years old, BT will see from the credit scan that the debtor is no longer on the electoral roll and that you are (if you have been registered long enough).

As long as you are now on the roll, the misdemeanors of the previous occupants will not affect your credit rating at all. As mentioned to Adam, if you want confirmation, email me your details and I'll run it through the Equifax system and pass on the report.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Well it's never happened to me, or anyone I know, but I have seen/heard/read several consumer-interest items where BT have done exactly that. There used to be someone dodgy living at your house? In that case we'll have an advance payment please. There are dodgy people living in your street? In that case we'll have an advance payment please.

Maybe they can't get away with it now that theu no longer have a monopoly.

 

[ninebob]

I don't work for, and never have worked for, BT - so I can't comment on their policy. My guess would be that if they demand advance payment in those circumstances it's because they've been stung by people at that address before. As I've said, from my experience of their dealings with credit reference agencies, if you're listed on the electoral register you'll be fine, but obviously (and understandably) most people want a BT line connected within days of moving to a new place, and it takes months to get registered on the roll, so I guess BT need to do whatever they feel they have to to satisfy themselves that you're not the old debt-ower.

 

[dingbat]

Way back in the days of nationalised industries, multi-tiered organisations and armies of clerks it was a common scam to regularly send small invoices to large companies in the knowledge that anything below a certain amount would be paid without higher authorisation. Some scammers even managed to set up regular payments from the stung companies and could then sit back and simply rake in the cheques. I even heard that it was legal; You send a request for payment, they pay without checking... job done.

 

[securespark]

In 1990 I lived in a rented flat where many others had lived before me.

BT insisted on advance payment, but I fought with them, proving who I was and they actually apologised and changed to quarterly bills.

But it was their initial arguement that sent me more angry than Victor Meldrew on a really bad day....

"We have had previous debtors in the property before you, and in addition, we don't know your payment history, AND within the same block we have other debtors we have disconnected. Who's to say you're not going to invite them all in to your property to continue running up yet more debt?"

Scandalous!!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

In 1990 I lived in a rented flat where many others had lived before me.

BT insisted on advance payment, but I fought with them, proving who I was and they actually apologised and changed to quarterly bills.

But it was their initial arguement that sent me more angry than Victor Meldrew on a really bad day....

"We have had previous debtors in the property before you, and in addition, we don't know your payment history, AND within the same block we have other debtors we have disconnected. Who's to say you're not going to invite them all in to your property to continue running up yet more debt?"

Scandalous!!

Indeed

I guess BT need to do whatever they feel they have to to satisfy themselves that you're not the old debt-ower.

I think the complaint was that they did bvgger-all to satisfy themselves, they just said "previous occupant and/or neighbours dodgy, therefore you are dodgy". As SS said - he had to fight with them. Anyway - this is now way off-topic...

 

[securespark]

Now, now Ban

Let's not get back into chocolate...