Credit bureau Veda has been ordered to apologise to a consumer and pay compensation for using false credit reporting information and failing to check its accuracy. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner also found that Veda's correction process placed an "undue burden" on individuals to identify errors.The OAIC determination, issued last month, found that Veda had committed four separate breaches of the Privacy Act.In June 2014 Veda recorded a judgment debt worth about A$7000 on the complainant's credit file. The complainant was not the defendant in the case and had no relationship with the defendant.The only connection was that the complainant and the defendant had similar names (but not first names) and lived in the same apartment building.Veda's automatic matching system drew a connection between the judgment and the complainant and recorded the judgment on the complainant's credit file.Veda's system then sent out an automated alert to registered creditors of the complainant.The complainant, a business owner, became aware of all this when he travelled overseas later the same month and had a credit card payment declined at a foreign airport. American Express had suspended his account after receiving Veda's notification.The complainant received notification from two suppliers to his business that they had tried to charge his Citibank credit card for payment but the payments were declined.Citibank and NAB, another of the complainant's credit card providers, reduced his credit limits.When he returned to Australian the complainant obtained a copy of his credit file and identified the error. He advised Veda of the incorrect listing but was told he would need to approach the court for correction. He was told Veda would not take action until it heard from the court.The complainant had to engage a lawyer to correspond with the court. In August Veda received information from the court and removed the listing, and in September it notified the complainant's credit providers that the listing had been removed.The OAIC found that Veda interfered with the complainant's privacy by not taking such steps as were reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that certain credit information it collected about the complainant was accurate, up-to-date and complete as required by the Privacy Act."It appears that Veda incorrectly assumed that the information provided by the court contained typographical errors. It took no steps to confirm that was the case before including the listing on the complainant's credit file," the OAIC said."Once Veda became aware that neither the name or the address provided by the court were a match, it should have been on notice that further steps were required to confirm the accuracy of the information it had collected."The OAIC also found that Veda failed to take such steps as were reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that certain credit reporting information it disclosed was accurate, up-to-date, complete and relevant as required.Veda used credit reporting information that was false or misleading in a material particular in contravention of the Privacy ActAnd it failed to give each recipient of the incorrect information written notice of