Upheld: Credit file / adverse marker disputes complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6207233 of 2026-06-30T00:00:00+00:00. Credit file / adverse marker disputes complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6207233 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-30T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Barclays Bank UK PLC |
| Product | Personal loan |
| Claim type | Credit file / adverse marker disputes |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Barclays must: (1) rescind the default and remove the default marker from Mr F's credit file, ensuring no adverse credit reporting results from the unfair default; (2) contact Mr F to agree a repayment plan for any outstanding arrears; (3) arrange for scheduled repayments to resume as if the loan had not been defaulted, with no additional interest applied for the period of unfair default treatment; (4) re-open Mr F's business account if it was closed, or take reasonable steps to place him in an equivalent position; (5) pay Mr F a further £200 compensation (in addition to the £200 already paid) to reflect distress and inconvenience caused by the incorrect default. |
Summary
Mr F took out a Bounce Back Loan with Barclays and fell into arrears by early 2025. Barclays issued a default notice on 18 June 2025 requiring payment of £653.53 by 16 July 2025. Mr F paid £700 on 8 July 2025, exceeding the required amount and meeting the deadline. However, Barclays defaulted the loan because a further contractual payment that fell due on the same day was not made. The ombudsman upheld Mr F's complaint, finding that the default notice did not clearly explain that future payments would also need to be made, and that Mr F had complied with the notice's requirements. Barclays was ordered to rescind the default, remove it from Mr F's credit file, resume loan repayments, and pay additional compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The default notice set out a specific arrears amount of £653.53 that needed to be paid by 16 July 2025 to remedy the breach. Mr F paid £700 before the deadline, clearly complying with the notice's requirements. The notice did not explain that further payments falling due before the deadline would also need to be made to avoid default. The payment that fell due on 8 July 2025 constituted a new instance of arrears, not part of the earlier breach identified in the notice. It was therefore unfair for Barclays to rely on this later missed payment to conclude that the breach in the default notice had not been remedied. The ombudsman placed greater weight on what the notice communicated to Mr F and what he could reasonably have understood from it, rather than Barclays' internal processes.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Barclays Bank UK PLC, all decisions | 11,233 | 21% |
| Credit file / adverse marker disputes, all decisions | 9,707 | 27% |
| Personal loan, all decisions | 22,885 | 29% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website