Veste

Not upheld: account closure, credit file reporting, discrimination claim complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard)

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6226758 of 2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00. account closure, credit file reporting, discrimination claim complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard). Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6226758
Decision date2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00
FirmBarclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard)
ProductCredit card
Claim typeaccount closure, credit file reporting, discrimination claim
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNone. No compensation awarded.

Summary

Mr S complained that Barclays closed his credit card account with immediate effect without explanation, and alleged discrimination, adverse credit file impact, and loss of reward scheme benefits. Barclays closed the account in accordance with the terms and conditions which permitted immediate closure in certain circumstances, and provided supporting information justifying this action. The ombudsman found no evidence of discrimination, confirmed that credit file reporting was accurate, and noted that reward scheme benefits ceased upon closure as per the scheme terms. The complaint was not upheld and no compensation was awarded.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Barclays is entitled to close an account provided it complies with the terms and conditions. The terms permitted immediate closure in certain circumstances, and Barclays provided supporting information justifying this action. The ombudsman was satisfied Barclays acted fairly and in line with its contractual obligations. Regarding discrimination, no evidence was found to indicate unfair treatment under the Equality Act 2010. The credit file reporting was accurate as Barclays only reported the late payment, which is its duty. The reward scheme benefits ceased upon closure as per the scheme terms.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard), all decisions5413%
Credit card, all decisions25,21122%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website