Not upheld: adverse credit reporting / unfair recording of credit information complaint against First Central Insurance Management Limited trading as 1st Central

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs S purchased a motor insurance policy from First Central in March 2025 but claimed she requested cancellation shortly after via online chat when she found a cheaper alternative. First Central identified an error in the proposal and sent repeated communications (emails and text messages) in March requesting information, warning that failure to respond could result in policy changes or cancellation. After Mrs S did not respond, First Central cancelled the policy and advised an outstanding amount of £43 was owed for cover provided, warning that non-payment could result in adverse credit reporting. When Mrs S did not pay, First Central reported the missed payment to credit agencies. Mrs S later settled the amount and complained. The ombudsman rejected the complaint, finding First Central provided clear notice, used multiple communication methods, and explicitly warned of credit consequences, meeting the standard for fair adverse credit reporting.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the standard that a business should record adverse credit information where a valid amount remains unpaid, the consumer has been clearly told what is owed, and warned about consequences of non-payment. First Central met this standard by: (1) providing repeated and reasonable notice through multiple communications via email and text message; (2) clearly explaining the outstanding amount of £43 owed for cover provided; (3) explicitly warning that adverse credit reporting could result from non-payment; and (4) using contact methods that Mrs S herself had provided. Even accepting Mrs S's claim that she requested cancellation via online chat (which was not supported by First Central's records), the firm's subsequent communications provided reasonable notice of the need to resolve the policy issue. Mrs S's lack of email access did not make First Central's actions unfair given the use of alternative communication methods.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website