Not upheld: section 75 claim - faulty goods and breach of contract complaint against Lloyds Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs B purchased bifold doors for £5,796.60 that proved faulty and could not be secured. After the supplier ceased trading without successfully repairing them, Mrs B claimed a refund under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. Lloyds commissioned an independent inspection report which confirmed the doors were faulty but stated they could be repaired, and asked Mrs B to obtain repair quotes. Mrs B believed the doors were beyond repair and requested a full refund, which Lloyds rejected. The ombudsman found Lloyds acted reasonably by seeking expert advice and relying on the inspector's recommendation for repairs, and therefore did not uphold the complaint, though Mrs B remains free to pursue repair quotes or bring a separate complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Lloyds acted reasonably by obtaining independent expert advice, which is the appropriate approach when technical expertise is required. The inspector's findings that the doors were faulty (supporting Mrs B's claim) but could be repaired (supporting Lloyds' position) meant it was fair for Lloyds to ask for repair quotes before agreeing to a refund. While the original installer's failed repairs were noted, the ombudsman could not ignore the independent inspector's professional recommendation. The bank's communication approach was also reasonable given email delivery issues.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website