Not upheld: unfair credit relationship under Section 140A CCA; Section 75 CCA claim for misrepresentation and breach of contract; alleged breach of Timeshare Regulations Regulation 14(3); alleged unfair contract terms; alleged failure to disclose commission complaint against Tandem Personal Loans Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H purchased a fractional timeshare membership for £7,687 financed by a personal loan from Tandem Personal Loans Ltd. He subsequently complained that the supplier misrepresented the product as an investment in breach of Timeshare Regulations and that the lender was party to an unfair credit relationship. The ombudsman found no actionable misrepresentation or breach of contract, and although accepting the possibility of a breach of Regulation 14(3), concluded this did not materially influence Mr H's purchase decision. The ombudsman rejected arguments about unfair contract terms, pressure, and commission non-disclosure. The complaint was not upheld, and no remedy was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied a holistic approach to Section 140A analysis, considering whether regulatory breaches automatically create unfairness. The key reasoning was that even if the supplier breached Regulation 14(3) by marketing the membership as an investment, this did not materially impact Mr H's decision to purchase, as the evidence suggested he was motivated by holiday benefits rather than investment returns. The ombudsman found insufficient evidence that Mr H's purchase decision would have differed had the alleged breaches not occurred. Regarding Section 75, no actionable misrepresentation was found, and no specific breach of contract was alleged. The ombudsman rejected arguments about unfair contract terms, pressure, and commission non-disclosure, finding none demonstrated actual unfairness in practice.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website