Not upheld: irresponsible lending / insufficient affordability checks complaint against PROPEL HOLDINGS (UK) LIMITED trading as Quidmarket

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T complained that Quidmarket lent him four short-term loans between March 2021 and December 2022 without conducting sufficient affordability checks. Mr T argued that the lender relied on inaccurate transaction summaries rather than full bank statements, failed to account for his high payday loan commitments of nearly £1,200 per month, and ignored warning signs of unsustainable borrowing. The ombudsman found that Quidmarket conducted proportionate checks appropriate to each stage of the lending relationship, including income verification via payslips, outgoings assessment, credit searches, and bank transaction logs for the later loans. While Mr T had historical payment problems and repeat borrowing, the evidence available to Quidmarket did not clearly demonstrate unsustainable lending, and the ombudsman did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the principle that affordability checks must be proportionate to the circumstances. For the first loan, less thorough checks were appropriate. For subsequent loans, Quidmarket conducted proportionate checks including income verification via payslips, cross-checking of outgoings, credit searches, and for loans 3-4, bank transaction logs. While Mr T claimed high payday loan commitments, these were not evidenced in the credit checks or transaction logs provided. The transaction logs did not reveal clear signs of financial difficulty or unsustainable spending patterns that would have prompted further investigation. The ombudsman found that Quidmarket's checks demonstrated the loans were affordable and sustainable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website