Not upheld: Debt collection practices complaint against Charterhouse Claims Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5020033 of 2024-11-27T00:00:00+00:00. Debt collection practices complaint against Charterhouse Claims Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5020033 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2024-11-27T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Charterhouse Claims Limited |
| Product | Other regulated product |
| Claim type | Debt collection practices |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman reminded CCL of their obligation to treat Mrs M with due consideration and to ensure her financial situation is fairly considered when arranging a repayment plan, but declined to specify what a fair repayment plan should look like as this is outside the ombudsman's jurisdiction. |
Summary
Mrs M instructed CCL to pursue an unaffordable lending claim against lender B. Lender B offered a balance reduction of £3,083.44 as a goodwill gesture rather than upholding the claim. Mrs M accepted this offer directly without consulting CCL, who then invoiced her for their settlement fee. Mrs M complained that the fee was unfair because the balance reduction was a goodwill gesture rather than a successful claim outcome, and that CCL's collection practices amounted to harassment. The ombudsman found the fee was properly charged under the agreed terms and conditions, which explicitly covered balance reductions as settlement proposals, and that CCL's collection activity was reasonable and not excessive.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that CCL's fee was properly charged under the terms and conditions Mrs M agreed to, which explicitly covered balance reductions as settlement proposals. The ombudsman reasoned that without CCL's claim submission, lender B would not have been aware of Mrs M's financial situation and would not have offered the goodwill gesture. Therefore, CCL's work created the financial benefit. Regarding collection practices, the ombudsman found the contact attempts were reasonable given the circumstances, particularly as Mrs M had accepted the offer without consulting CCL and then failed to return calls regarding payment arrangements.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Charterhouse Claims Limited, all decisions | 8 | 12% |
| Debt collection practices, all decisions | 4,897 | 26% |
| Other regulated product, all decisions | 47,449 | 30% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website