Not upheld: Section 75 claim handling - alleged breach of contract and failure to perform services with reasonable care and skill complaint against Lloyds Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Miss D paid £2,000 to a veterinary hospital for corrective surgery on her dog using her Lloyds credit card. She disputed the accuracy of clinical notes that recorded a BOAS diagnosis, arguing the dog had not been formally diagnosed with this condition. After the veterinary provider refused to amend the records but offered to add a note of disagreement per RCVS guidelines, Miss D raised a Section 75 claim with Lloyds alleging breach of contract and failure to perform services with reasonable care and skill. Lloyds rejected the claim, and the ombudsman upheld this decision, finding insufficient evidence of breach and determining that Lloyds reasonably accepted the veterinary provider's offer to add an amendment in accordance with professional guidelines.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the dispute concerned complex veterinary clinical judgment regarding the interpretation of medical observations, not the corrective surgery itself. The ombudsman noted that neither Lloyds nor the ombudsman had expertise in veterinary medicine. The ombudsman found insufficient independent evidence to demonstrate that E's wording was inaccurate or failed to reflect G's symptoms, particularly given G's history of breathing concerns. The ombudsman considered that Lloyds reasonably accepted E's offer to add an amendment in line with RCVS guidelines, which provide for disputed information to be noted alongside the medical opinion. The ombudsman concluded that even if the information was inaccurate, Lloyds could not compel E to remove recorded information, so repeat performance was not a viable remedy under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website