Partially upheld: Termination of Hire Purchase Agreement; provision of incorrect information; alleged breach of Consumer Credit Act Section 90 complaint against ADVANTAGE FINANCE LIMITED
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6215248 of 2026-05-28T00:00:00+00:00. Termination of Hire Purchase Agreement; provision of incorrect information; alleged breach of Consumer Credit Act Section 90 complaint against ADVANTAGE FINANCE LIMITED. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6215248 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-28T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | ADVANTAGE FINANCE LIMITED |
| Product | Hire Purchase Agreement |
| Claim type | Termination of Hire Purchase Agreement; provision of incorrect information; alleged breach of Consumer Credit Act Section 90 |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | Advantage Finance Limited to pay Mrs S £100 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by the provision of incorrect and misleading information. |
Summary
Mrs S complained about Advantage Finance Limited's termination of her Hire Purchase Agreement and their attempts to recover the vehicle. A Notice of Default was issued in November 2024 due to arrears of approximately £1,400, and despite forbearance through payment plans, arrears remained outstanding. Advantage terminated the agreement in December 2025 after making nine contact attempts. Mrs S claimed breach of statutory notice periods and failure to show forbearance as a vulnerable customer, and alleged deliberate misrepresentation. The ombudsman found the termination was fair and lawful, and that Advantage complied with Section 90 of the Consumer Credit Act. However, the ombudsman upheld the complaint regarding incorrect information provided in January 2026 about Mrs S's payment status and ordered £100 compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Advantage was legally entitled to terminate the HPA as arrears set out in the November 2024 NOD were never cleared within the 14-day period and remained live. Forbearance was offered through payment plans but these failed, and after July 2025 no further payments were made. Advantage made reasonable attempts to contact Mrs S prior to termination. However, the ombudsman found that incorrect and misleading information was provided to Mrs S on at least one occasion in January 2026 regarding her payment status, though this was corrected later the same day. The ombudsman rejected claims of deliberate misrepresentation and found no breach of Section 90 of the Consumer Credit Act as the car had not been repossessed without consent or court order.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| ADVANTAGE FINANCE LIMITED, all decisions | 45 | 8% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website