Not upheld: misrepresentation of hire agreement terms, failure to provide support during financial hardship, unfair early settlement figure complaint against Bibby Leasing Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6034707 of 2026-04-01T00:00:00+00:00. misrepresentation of hire agreement terms, failure to provide support during financial hardship, unfair early settlement figure complaint against Bibby Leasing Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6034707 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-01T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Bibby Leasing Limited |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | misrepresentation of hire agreement terms, failure to provide support during financial hardship, unfair early settlement figure |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman declined to direct Bibby to take further action, though noted that if K wishes to accept the reduced settlement figure of £500, it should contact Bibby to confirm the offer remains available. |
Summary
K complained that Bibby misrepresented a hire agreement for a van, failed to support K during financial hardship, and provided an unfair early settlement figure. K had entered the agreement via a credit broker in December 2020 and later experienced a cambelt failure in July 2024. K contacted the broker about the failure but did not explicitly notify Bibby of financial hardship until April 2025 when submitting a formal complaint. The ombudsman found that Bibby was not responsible for the broker's conduct under Section 56 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (which does not apply to hire agreements), that the agreement was clear and properly signed, that the July 2024 communication did not constitute a financial hardship notification, and that the cambelt failure was due to wear and tear. The ombudsman concluded that Bibby's offer of a reduced settlement figure and collection services in April 2025 demonstrated appropriate forbearance and did not uphold the complaint.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied Section 56 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, which does not apply to hire agreements, meaning Bibby is not responsible for the broker's antecedent negotiations. The hire agreement clearly stated it was a hire agreement and that K would not own the van. K's representatives signed and initialled the agreement, confirming understanding. The July 2024 communication to SA did not constitute a clear notification of financial hardship to Bibby. The cambelt failure after three years and 50,000 miles was attributable to wear and tear, not a defect at supply. When Bibby became aware of financial hardship in April 2025, they offered a significantly reduced settlement figure and collection services, demonstrating forbearance and due consideration.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Bibby Leasing Limited, all decisions | 1 | 0% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 18,521 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website