Not upheld: credit agreement validity and interest rate dispute complaint against J D Williams & Company Limited trading as Home Essentials

Decision detail

Summary

Miss R complained that Home Essentials could not provide a signed copy of her credit agreement and that she never agreed to the 74.99% APR interest rate being charged. She applied online in April 2022 for a £1,200 credit facility and alleged the provided agreement copy was fraudulent. Home Essentials demonstrated that their online application process required tick-box acceptance rather than signature, which is legitimate industry practice, and provided screenshots of the process. The ombudsman found the firm's evidence compelling and, without additional evidence supporting Miss R's recollection, determined the agreement appears valid and the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that obtaining customer acceptance through tick-box confirmation on online applications is a legitimate and common practice that does not require a physical signature. The evidence provided by Home Essentials about the application process was found to be compelling and consistent with standard industry practice. Without additional evidence supporting Miss R's recollection of a different agreement, the ombudsman was satisfied that the provided agreement appears valid and there was no evidence of fraud or incorrect conduct by the lender.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website