Not upheld: irresponsible lending - insufficient affordability checks complaint against Quidie Limited trading as Fernovo
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5872104 of 2026-04-24T00:00:00+00:00. irresponsible lending - insufficient affordability checks complaint against Quidie Limited trading as Fernovo. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5872104 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-24T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Quidie Limited trading as Fernovo |
| Product | Payday / short-term credit |
| Claim type | irresponsible lending - insufficient affordability checks |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman noted that Quidie's previous goodwill offer to remove interest from loan 3 is no longer available. The ombudsman reminded Quidie of its obligation to treat Mr G fairly and with forbearance given his known vulnerabilities, and suggested Mr G contact Quidie to discuss what help and support might be available. |
Summary
Mr G complained that Quidie Limited lent to him irresponsibly by failing to conduct sufficient affordability checks before approving three £300 loans between September 2024 and May 2025. Mr G argued that more thorough checks would have revealed he was in financial difficulties, had been suspended from work, was gambling, had vulnerabilities affecting his money management, and was taking loans from other lenders. The ombudsman found that Quidie's checks were proportionate to the circumstances of each loan, using a combination of Mr G's declarations, credit reference agency information, and Money Advice Service averages to verify affordability. The ombudsman rejected the complaint because the information about Mr G's employment suspension, gambling, and vulnerabilities was not disclosed to Quidie and would not have been discovered through proportionate checks, and the pattern of borrowing did not demonstrate obvious unsustainability.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied the principle that lenders must conduct proportionate affordability checks appropriate to the circumstances. For loan 1, less thorough checks were proportionate for an early-stage lending relationship. For loans 2 and 3, although the pattern of repeat borrowing was noted, the ombudsman found the checks remained proportionate because: the loan amounts did not increase, Mr G was not indebted for the entire period, the three-month gap between loans 1 and 2 showed some independence from Quidie's lending, and the credit file showed no concerning indicators of financial difficulty. The ombudsman rejected arguments that bank statements should have been obtained, finding this would have been disproportionate given the circumstances. Crucially, information about employment suspension, gambling, and vulnerabilities was not disclosed to Quidie and would not have been discovered through proportionate checks at that time.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Quidie Limited trading as Fernovo, all decisions | 4 | 0% |
| Payday / short-term credit, all decisions | 9,689 | 50% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website