Not upheld: alleged misleading information regarding arrears repayment obligations following a payment concession complaint against Bank of Ireland (UK) Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr and Mrs F complained that Bank of Ireland misled them about having to repay arrears after a three-month zero payment concession granted in April 2025 when Mr F lost his job. They claimed they were told the arrears would be added to the mortgage balance and the term extended, but were later required to set up a six-month repayment plan. The ombudsman found that Bank of Ireland explicitly stated during the call that it did not offer such capitalisation and that a repayment arrangement would be put in place once Mr F returned to work, with amounts assessed based on future affordability. The ombudsman rejected the complaint, finding no misleading information and noting that Bank of Ireland could not have specified exact repayment terms without knowing Mr F's future circumstances.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Bank of Ireland clearly communicated during the April 2025 call that it did not offer payment holidays with arrears capitalisation, and that once Mr F returned to work, a repayment arrangement would be put in place based on what was affordable at that time. The bank could not have specified a six-month repayment period in advance because it did not know Mr F's future income or circumstances. The confirmation letter's use of the word 'options' was not misleading given the uncertainty about future circumstances. The ombudsman rejected the argument that Bank of Ireland should have disclosed its internal criteria for capitalising arrears (which requires six months of maintained payments) at the outset of the concession discussion.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website