Veste

Not upheld: irresponsible lending complaint against Barclays Bank UK plc trading as Tesco Bank

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6306313 of 2026-05-06T00:00:00+00:00. irresponsible lending complaint against Barclays Bank UK plc trading as Tesco Bank. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6306313
Decision date2026-05-06T00:00:00+00:00
FirmBarclays Bank UK plc trading as Tesco Bank
Productcredit card
Claim typeirresponsible lending
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNone. The complaint was not upheld. The ombudsman reminded Tesco of its obligations regarding forbearance if Mr P is now struggling financially.

Summary

Mr P complained that Tesco Bank lent to him irresponsibly when it provided a £3,900 credit card in June 2023, arguing that the firm's affordability checks were insufficient. Mr P subsequently revealed he was self-employed with fluctuating income and significant business costs, and was supporting a family of six including a disabled child. However, the ombudsman found that Tesco's checks were reasonable and proportionate, relying on credit reference agency data, ONS statistics, and the information Mr P had provided. Since Mr P had not disclosed that his declared income was business turnover or informed Tesco of additional costs, the firm was not obliged to conduct further investigations. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Tesco carried out reasonable and proportionate affordability checks appropriate to the circumstances. Tesco was not obliged to review bank statements given the modest credit amount and Mr P's failure to disclose that his declared income was business turnover rather than net income. The use of ONS data was permissible under CONC 5.2A.19 as Tesco had no reasonable cause to suspect Mr P's non-discretionary expenditure was significantly higher than the statistical data suggested. Tesco appropriately considered Mr P's four dependants in its assessment.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Barclays Bank UK plc trading as Tesco Bank, all decisions6611%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website