Talk:Cifas

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This sounds like a great service ... but how do I know its not a scam ... so I check out wikipedia as I always do. Can we help identify CIFAS as genuine (or otherwise)

This is a genuine organisation. More information and contact details can be found on the CIFAS Website: www.cifas.org.uk

--

The article as it stands seems to describe the objectives of protective registration as presented by CIFAS.

If you google for CIFAS, you'll find lots of people whom believe that their credit rating has been affected by a CIFAS listing. This should not be the case, service providers should only be taking additional steps to verify the applicants identity. Indeed, a CIFAS listing should provide better protection to the applicant compared with standard checking. Any individual can apply to CIFAS to request they be listed (and pay for the privilege).

Whether applicants really are adversely affected is not known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.189.175.44 (talk) 12:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-- Almost the whole article has been cut-and-pasted from CIFAS's own Website. Controversy about CIFAS' role ought to be considered within the article, instead it presents a one-sided view of the organisation. It reads like an advert not an NPOV article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.197.7 (talk) 16:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]