Not upheld: debt collection practices - contacting debtor regarding debt discharged through bankruptcy complaint against ACI-UK LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained that ACI-UK LIMITED contacted him about a debt that had been discharged through bankruptcy, causing him significant distress. ACI had taken over servicing the debt on 4 April 2025 and made approximately 20 contacts (or 25 calls by Mr B's count) between April and June 2025. The ombudsman found that ACI could not have known about the bankruptcy because it had been removed from the insolvency register approximately 9 months before they took over the account. The ombudsman determined that ACI's contact frequency was not excessive and their requirement for verification before recording Mr B's bankruptcy claim was reasonable. The ombudsman upheld only the poor handling of a specific call on 18 June 2025 and found ACI's offer of £125 compensation to be fair and reasonable in the circumstances.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that ACI could not reasonably have known about the bankruptcy because it had been removed from the insolvency register 9 months before they took over the account. Therefore, ACI did not act wrongly in initially contacting Mr B for repayment. The frequency of contact (approximately 2.5 contacts per week) was not unreasonable given ACI's legitimate belief they had a right to collect the debt. ACI's requirement for verification before recording Mr B's bankruptcy claim was reasonable, as they needed to confirm they were speaking to the correct person. The only error was the poor handling of the 18 June 2025 call, for which ACI had already offered £125. Since the vast majority of Mr B's distress occurred before this date and ACI had not acted wrongly during that period, no additional compensation was warranted.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website