Not upheld: unfair credit relationship under Section 140A CCA; rejection of Section 75 claim; alleged misrepresentation; affordability concerns complaint against Clydesdale Financial Services Limited (trading as Barclays Partner Finance)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M purchased a Fractional Club timeshare membership on 28 December 2009 for £20,725, financing £15,725 through a credit agreement with the Lender. In March 2017, through a professional representative, he complained of misrepresentation, inadequate affordability checks, sales pressure, and improper investment marketing. The Lender rejected the complaint in June 2017. The ombudsman found the Section 75 misrepresentation claim was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980 (made over seven years after purchase, beyond the six-year limit) and that there was no unfair credit relationship under Section 140A, as the lending was affordable, sales pressure was not substantiated, and alleged misrepresentations were not evidenced. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Limitation Act 1980 Section 9, which requires misrepresentation claims to be made within six years of when the loss occurred (December 2009). Since Mr M's claim was not made until 2017, it was outside the limitation period and the Lender fairly rejected it. Regarding Section 140A, the ombudsman found insufficient evidence of unfair credit relationship: the lending was affordable based on Mr M's retirement income; there was insufficient evidence of sales pressure impairing Mr M's choice; alleged misrepresentations were not substantiated; and no commission was evidenced as having been paid. The professional representative failed to provide credible, substantiated evidence for its claims.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website