Upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Lloyds Bank Plc
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6139688 of 2026-06-19T00:00:00+00:00. Goods and services under S75 complaint against Lloyds Bank Plc. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6139688 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-19T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Lloyds Bank Plc |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | Goods and services under S75 |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Lloyds to pay Mr B an additional £150 compensation (total £250) for distress and inconvenience caused by the misrepresentation. Payment due within 28 days of Mr B's acceptance of the decision, with 8% simple yearly interest if paid later. Car rejection with refund of deposit and payments already offered and accepted by Mr B. |
Summary
Mr B purchased a used car via hire purchase agreement with Lloyds in August 2025. Days after collection, he discovered poorly repaired accident damage on the car's offside rear that the dealership was aware of but failed to disclose. Lloyds arranged an independent engineer inspection which found accident repair work across multiple panels. Although Lloyds initially offered repair based on the engineer's report, Mr B obtained quotes showing more extensive repairs were needed and ultimately accepted rejection of the car. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding misrepresentation by omission, and directed Lloyds to pay an additional £150 compensation (total £250) for distress and inconvenience caused.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that the dealership, acting as Lloyds' agent, made a false statement of fact by omission by failing to disclose the previous accident damage. This misrepresentation induced Mr B to finance the car, as evidenced by his actions upon discovering the damage. While Lloyds reasonably relied on the independent engineer's report to make an initial repair offer, the ombudsman concluded that had Lloyds been aware of the actual extent of damage and repair costs upfront, rejection would have been the appropriate remedy from the outset. The ombudsman rejected Mr B's request to remove the agreement from his credit file, as the settled agreement with all payments made on time would have a neutral or positive impact. Additional compensation of £150 was awarded for distress and inconvenience, bringing the total to £250.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Lloyds Bank Plc, all decisions | 19,867 | 16% |
| Goods and services under S75, all decisions | 19,872 | 36% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 19,840 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website