Fixing one agency does not fix the others

Both approaches to multiple credit agencies work. What differs is what they cost you, and the cost is what this sets out.

Why the files differ

Reporting is voluntary in many systems, and lenders choose which agencies to supply. A card issuer may report to two agencies and not the third, so an account exists on some files and not others.

Each agency also holds its own address and association records, built from what it has received. That is why a clean file at one agency tells you very little about the others.

Corrections do not propagate

Each agency investigates disputes independently and amends only its own record. The lender may correct its data at source and send it to all agencies it reports to, and it may not.

For most people, assuming a fix has spread is one of the most common reasons an error resurfaces during an application. Dispute at every agency that shows the entry, and confirm each separately.

You cannot tell which agency a lender uses

Lenders rarely publish which agency or agencies they consult, and many use more than one. A decline may therefore rest on a file you have never checked. Most jurisdictions require a lender to tell you which agency it used if you ask after a refusal, which makes that the first question.

Until you know, checking all of them is the only reliable approach.

Building a checking routine

Identify every agency operating in your country, which is usually a small number, and obtain each file. Compare them line by line for accounts, addresses, searches and associations that appear on one and not another. Differences are normal; contradictions are errors.

Do this once properly and thereafter it takes minutes to repeat.

Coverage gaps cut both ways

An account with a perfect payment record that is reported to only one agency contributes nothing on the others. That can make a file look thin at a lender that happens to use the agency your lenders do not report to. You cannot compel a lender to report anywhere, and knowing the gap explains an otherwise baffling decline.

On an ordinary week, holding accounts with a spread of mainstream lenders tends to produce broader coverage.

When one agency will not correct

If two agencies accept a correction and one refuses, escalate that one through its complaints process and then the ombudsman or data protection authority. The agreement of the others is useful evidence in that escalation.

Keep the correspondence from the successful corrections for exactly that purpose. Consistency across agencies is a reasonable thing to insist on, and it usually has to be insisted on.

Side by side

The takeaway

Treat each agency as a separate organisation with a separate file. Correct all of them, and check that all of them changed.

Pick the one that costs you least, and let the rest wait.