Not upheld: irresponsible lending complaint against Hastings Financial Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs M complained that Hastings irresponsibly approved a £10,000 loan in August 2025, claiming she had been the victim of an investment scam and that the lender failed to conduct proportionate affordability checks. Hastings defended its decision, stating it had conducted proportionate checks including CRA data review, affordability assessment, and income verification, all of which indicated the loan was sustainable. The ombudsman found that Hastings' checks were proportionate to the lending type and term, revealed a stable financial position with no defaults or missed payments, and that the lender was entitled to rely on the information gathered. The complaint was not upheld, and the ombudsman clarified that Mrs M's concerns about the scam itself were separate from the irresponsible lending complaint and could be pursued separately.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Hastings' checks were proportionate to the type of lending and loan term. The checks revealed a stable financial position with no indicators of unaffordability or unsustainability. Although Mrs M claimed her income was overstated, Hastings had verified the figure and received no indication it was inaccurate. The ombudsman noted there is no regulatory requirement for lenders to review specific documents such as bank statements, and Hastings was entitled to rely on the checks it performed. The results of those checks did not warrant further scrutiny of Mrs M's circumstances.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website