Not upheld: misadvice regarding payment obligations and credit file reporting complaint against Shop Direct Finance Company Limited trading as Very

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C complained that Very misadvised him during a May 2025 call by telling him there was nothing in arrears except his BNPL purchase, leading him to believe no further payments were required. When fees and interest were added and late payments were reported to his credit file, Mr C sought removal of the outstanding balance, credit file amendment, and compensation. The ombudsman found the agent had accurately answered Mr C's specific question about arrears and that the monthly statements clearly showed an outstanding balance requiring further payments, making Mr C's interpretation unreasonable. The late payment reporting was found to be accurate, and the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the agent answered Mr C's specific question about arrears accurately - there were no arrears at that time. While it would have been helpful for the agent to clarify that an outstanding balance requiring further payments existed, the agent was not obliged to volunteer information beyond what was asked. Mr C's interpretation that no further payments were needed was unreasonable given that the monthly statements clearly showed a separate outstanding balance. The late payment markers on the credit file accurately reflected Mr C's failure to make payments when due, so there was no error to correct.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website