Not upheld: disclosure of information to third party; alleged breach of confidentiality complaint against Kensington Mortgage Company Limited trading as Acenden

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A complained that Acenden unfairly informed his ex-wife of the cancellation of a planned eviction, which he claimed breached a confidentiality agreement and prevented his plan to refurbish and sell the mortgaged property. Mr A's ex-wife held a Home Rights Notice protecting her right to occupy the matrimonial home. The ombudsman found that while Mr A had a reasonable expectation that Acenden would not disclose account information to his ex-wife, informing her of the eviction cancellation was fair and reasonable as it concerned a matter personally impactful to her and was necessary to protect her legal rights under the Family Law Act 1996. The ombudsman rejected the argument that Acenden should have withheld information to facilitate Mr A's plan to deceive his ex-wife and concluded that Acenden did not act unfairly or unreasonably.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman concluded that while Mr A had a reasonable expectation that Acenden would not disclose account information to his ex-wife, informing her of the eviction cancellation was not a breach of this expectation. The cancellation information concerned a matter personally impactful to the ex-wife (her removal from the home) rather than account information. The ombudsman found that Acenden's action was in the spirit of the Family Law Act 1996 and the Home Rights Notice, which aim to protect a person from losing their home without knowledge or consent. The ombudsman rejected the notion that a lender should choose to deceive or withhold information to facilitate Mr A's plan, and found that Mr A's vulnerabilities did not change this conclusion.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website