Not upheld: unfair default registration complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC trading as Barclaycard

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained that Barclaycard unfairly registered a default against his credit card account. Mr B's account fell into arrears with regular missed payments towards the end of 2024, with his last payment in January 2025. Barclaycard made numerous unsuccessful attempts to contact Mr B by phone and sent letters warning of the arrears and potential default. A default notice was issued on 3 June 2025 and the default was registered on 30 July 2025. Mr B claimed he had been away and did not receive the default notice until after the deadline. The ombudsman found that Barclaycard acted reasonably in defaulting the account after six months of arrears with no contact from Mr B, and held Barclaycard not responsible for postal delivery failures. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied ICO guidance which expects defaults to be applied when repayments have not been made for three to six months and the lender-borrower relationship has broken down. By 30 July 2025, Mr B's account was at the end of the six-month period with no contact from him despite repeated attempts by Barclaycard. The ombudsman found it reasonable to conclude the relationship had irretrievably broken down. While Mr B claimed he did not receive the default notice due to postal delays, the ombudsman held Barclaycard not responsible for postal service failures and noted Mr B should have been aware of his arrears regardless. The ombudsman rejected Mr B's argument that he would have acted differently if he had received the letter, noting he had already failed to pay for over five months. The ombudsman also found that Mr B's undisclosed neurodivergent condition could not have been accommodated by Barclaycard and was unlikely to have caused the extended non-payment.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website