Not upheld: unfair treatment and refusal to accept reduced payment arrangement during financial difficulty complaint against SECURE TRUST BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY (trading as Moneyway)
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6277983 of 2026-04-30T00:00:00+00:00. unfair treatment and refusal to accept reduced payment arrangement during financial difficulty complaint against SECURE TRUST BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY (trading as Moneyway). Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6277983 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-30T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | SECURE TRUST BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY (trading as Moneyway) |
| Product | hire purchase agreement |
| Claim type | unfair treatment and refusal to accept reduced payment arrangement during financial difficulty |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman reminded Moneyway of its continued obligation to treat Mrs F with forbearance and due consideration, and advised Mrs F to consider all available options including part exchange, selling the car, or voluntary termination of the agreement. The ombudsman also reminded Moneyway that if Mrs F had paid more than one-third of the finance agreement, a court order would be required for repossession unless she voluntarily handed back the car. |
Summary
Mrs F complained that Moneyway treated her unfairly by refusing to accept reduced monthly payments of £50 on her hire purchase agreement for a car, despite her experiencing significant financial hardship due to job loss and long-term health issues preventing her from working. Moneyway had previously agreed to four separate payment arrangements with Mrs F and requested updated income and expenditure details before considering her proposal for substantially reduced payments. The ombudsman found that while lenders must provide forbearance and due consideration to customers in financial difficulty, Moneyway acted reasonably in refusing the arrangement given that Mrs F stated her circumstances were unlikely to improve and the agreement already had substantial arrears of £8,860.16. The complaint was not upheld, though the ombudsman reminded Moneyway of its continued obligations to treat Mrs F fairly and advised her to consider alternative options such as selling the car or voluntary termination.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman acknowledged Mrs F's difficult circumstances including bereavement and long-term health challenges, but found that Moneyway had taken reasonable steps to support her by agreeing to multiple payment arrangements and assessing affordability. While lenders should provide forbearance and due consideration, the ombudsman found it was not unreasonable for Moneyway to request updated income and expenditure details before considering a substantially reduced payment proposal. Critically, the ombudsman noted that Mrs F had stated her circumstances were unlikely to improve and that accepting £50 per month would take an extremely long time to clear the substantial arrears of £8,860.16, risking further accumulation. The ombudsman distinguished between short-term reduced payment arrangements (which are standard practice) and long-term arrangements where circumstances are not expected to improve.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| SECURE TRUST BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY (trading as Moneyway), all decisions | 8 | 0% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website