Not upheld: late payment reporting and credit file accuracy complaint against American Express Services Europe Limited (AESEL)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr L complained that AESEL incorrectly reported a late payment on his credit file after he missed the payment deadline on a newly opened Platinum Card account. Mr L claimed he assumed his existing direct debit would automatically transfer to the new account and that he was not adequately informed that he needed to set up a new direct debit. He also claimed he was given an unconditional assurance that the late payment marker would be removed but it was not. The ombudsman found that AESEL's communications were clear and sufficient, the late payment was accurately reported as the payment was genuinely made 13 days late, and there was no evidence of an unconditional assurance being given. The complaint was not upheld and no remedy was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that AESEL's communications were clear and unambiguous. The approval email specifically mentioned direct debit setup, and the statement clearly showed the payment due date without any reference to direct debit collection, which should have alerted Mr L that no direct debit was in place. The ombudsman was not persuaded that a payment reminder would have changed the outcome since Mr L was under the mistaken impression that a direct debit was already set up. Regarding the late payment marker, AESEL is obliged to report accurate information to credit reference agencies, and the payment was genuinely made after the due date. The ombudsman found no evidence of an unconditional assurance being given to remove the marker, only an offer to submit a request to the credit bureau amendment team. Therefore, AESEL acted fairly and in compliance with its obligations.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website