Not upheld: unfair treatment of vulnerable customer; failure to provide forbearance; unfair application of interest and charges; unfair default registration complaint against Capital One (Europe) plc

Decision detail

Summary

Miss J complained that Capital One (Europe) plc failed to treat her fairly as a vulnerable customer by continuing to apply interest and charges and defaulting her account despite her health difficulties. Miss J claimed she notified Capital One of her health problems in January 2025, and again in July 2025 via online chat. Capital One had no record of the January letter and by July, the account was already in significant arrears with a Default Notice issued. The ombudsman found that Capital One were not made aware of Miss J's circumstances until July 2025 when the account was too far advanced in the default process to reasonably prevent default, and that Miss J's brief online message was insufficient to require Capital One to halt proceedings. The complaint was not upheld and no remedy was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman accepted that Miss J likely sent a January 2025 letter but found no evidence Capital One received it. For a business to act on information, it must first be aware of it. The ombudsman considered it reasonable for Miss J to have followed up when she received continued arrears correspondence without response. By the time Capital One became clearly aware of Miss J's circumstances on 27 July 2025, the account was already in significant arrears and well advanced in the formal default process. While Capital One could have explored her circumstances further, the brief online message did not constitute a sufficient request for support to require them to halt proceedings. The ombudsman found that firms must treat customers in difficulty fairly, but what is appropriate depends on circumstances including extent of arrears, information available, and realistic prospect of recovery. Given the prolonged arrears, issued Default Notice, and lack of clear engagement from Miss J about resolution, the ombudsman concluded it was reasonable for Capital One to proceed with default.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website