Veste

Partially upheld: irresponsible lending - credit limit increases complaint against Lendable Ltd, trading as Zable

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6232852 of 2026-04-02T00:00:00+00:00. irresponsible lending - credit limit increases complaint against Lendable Ltd, trading as Zable. Outcome: Partially upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6232852
Decision date2026-04-02T00:00:00+00:00
FirmLendable Ltd, trading as Zable
Productcredit card
Claim typeirresponsible lending - credit limit increases
OutcomePartially upheld
RemedyZable must rework the account removing all interest, fees, charges and insurances applied to balances above £500 after 19 August 2023. If this results in a credit balance, it must be refunded with 8% simple interest per year from the date of each overpayment. If a balance remains above £500, Zable must arrange an affordable repayment plan. Zable must remove all adverse credit file information recorded after 19 August 2023.

Summary

Miss K complained that Zable irresponsibly provided her with a credit card and increased her credit limit four times between 2022 and 2025. The ombudsman found that the initial credit card and first limit increase to £500 were fair based on Miss K's verified income of approximately £2,600 per month and apparent disposable income. However, the ombudsman upheld the complaint regarding the three subsequent limit increases because Miss K had exceeded her credit limit in the three months immediately preceding the second increase in August 2023, and Zable had sent her notifications about managing her spending. The ombudsman ordered Zable to rework the account removing all interest and charges on balances above £500 from August 2023 onwards, refund any credit balance with interest, and remove adverse credit file information.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the initial credit card and CLI one were fair based on Miss K's income and apparent disposable income, CLI two should not have been granted because Miss K had exceeded her credit limit in the three months immediately preceding it. The fact that the exceedances occurred after interest was applied did not change the underlying concern. Whether the exceedances indicated unaffordability or poor financial management, it was not fair to increase the limit under those circumstances. This reasoning extended to CLI three and CLI four, which should not have followed.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Lendable Ltd, trading as Zable, all decisions114%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website