Not upheld: default notice compliance and unfair charges complaint against ADVANTAGE FINANCE LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C complained that Advantage Finance Limited unfairly issued a default notice on his hire purchase agreement that was unclear and legally non-compliant due to conflicting deadline information (14 days from receipt versus 27 December 2025). He also disputed a £60 collection fee and claimed he received incorrect telephone advice. Advantage argued the notice was sufficiently clear and that Mr C failed to remedy the arrears by either deadline. The ombudsman found the default notice, when read as a whole, provided sufficient clarity and time for remedy, with the fixed date being more generous than the alternative reference. The complaint was not upheld as Mr C did not clear arrears within the required timescales and insufficient evidence supported his other claims.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the balance of probabilities standard and considered the default notice as a whole. Although the notice contained conflicting deadline information (14 days from receipt versus 27 December 2025), the ombudsman found it still provided sufficient time to remedy the breach and made sufficiently clear what action was required. The fixed payment date of 27 December 2025 was more generous than the 14-day reference. The earlier communications provided context supporting that Mr C was aware of arrears and potential consequences. The payment made in December 2025 did not clear the arrears within the required timescales. Insufficient evidence was found regarding telephone discussions or the collection charge to render the overall handling unfair.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website