Not upheld: credit search conduct and disclosure complaint against Toyota Financial Services (UK) PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W complained that Toyota Financial Services conducted a hard credit search without his consent and that he was not adequately informed this would be a hard search. He also claimed he was not provided with terms and conditions by email. The ombudsman found that Toyota's terms and conditions adequately disclosed that a credit search would be made and reflected on the credit file, which would indicate a hard search to those familiar with credit files. Toyota removed the hard search from Mr W's credit file as requested. The ombudsman did not uphold the complaint, finding no loss was evidenced and the impact was minimal, and therefore awarded no compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the terms and conditions did not specifically use the words 'hard search', they adequately disclosed that a credit search would be made and reflected on the credit file. The ombudsman considered it important that a credit search would be made and reflected on the credit file, rather than prescribing specific wording or processes. Since Toyota removed the hard search as requested, it restored Mr W to his original position. No compensation was awarded as Mr W evidenced no loss and the impact was minimal.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website