3 paid-up judgments refused — Experian's own evidence proves they were paid

I have four judgments on my credit profile — case numbers 18695/2020, 4273/2021, 14282/2021 and 1013/2022 — all from the same creditor, the 20 West Road South Body Corporate, all fully paid, and all covered by a single paid-up letter from Barnard Attorneys dated 5 February 2026. That letter confirms full settlement and the creditor's consent to rescission of all four judgments.

On 25 February 2026 I submitted a formal Regulation 71A removal demand to Experian for all four judgments, with the Barnard paid-up letter as supporting evidence. Regulation 71A requires Experian to verify payment and remove paid-up judgment listings within 7 working days. It does not require Experian to investigate or seek evidence from the data supplier.

On 16 March 2026, Experian resolved judgment 4273/2021 in my favour and removed it. On the same day, Experian refused the other three — case numbers 1013/2022 (ref EXP***7-CD162080), 14282/2021 (ref EXP***7-CD162084), and 18695/2020 (ref EXP***7-CD162086) — on the grounds that it had received "credible evidence in the form of a call recording from the data supplier."

That "evidence" was a written statement from the previous attorneys, Otto Krause Inc, which reads: "Please note that we have not received payments on the above-mentioned case numbers when we were working on them. Kindly further note that the files have been closed and handed to the new attorneys."

This statement does not contradict my payment. It confirms it. Otto Krause says they did not receive payment while they were handling the files — because the files were then handed to new attorneys, Barnard Attorneys, who did receive payment and issued the paid-up letter. Experian took a statement that describes the exact sequence of events leading to my settlement and used it as grounds to refuse removal. That is not credible evidence. It is a misreading of the facts that has left three fully paid judgments on my credit profile.

There are three clear failures here:

1. Experian app**** a different standard to identical evidence. The same Barnard paid-up letter that was good enough to remove 4273/2021 was rejected for the other three judgments from the same matter, same creditor, same letter.

2. Experian app**** the wrong legal process. These are Regulation 71A paid-up judgment removals, not Regulation 17 accuracy disputes. Experian had no basis to go back to the data supplier for evidence at all.

3. The data supplier has no standing. The 20 West Road South Body Corporate is not a credit provider under the National Credit Act and cannot lawfully supply evidence in a credit dispute.

Three paid-up judgments remain on my credit profile as of today, 21 March 2026. Formal complaints have been lodged with the National Credit Regulator and the Information Regulator. I am requesting that Experian remove all three immediately under Regulation 71A.