Not upheld: debt collection practices; treatment of vulnerable customer; alleged unfair contact and intrusive enquiries complaint against Lowell Portfolio I Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B complained that Lowell Portfolio I Ltd sent threatening letters about debts for which she was already making payments, and made intrusive enquiries about her health and personal circumstances. Miss B is disabled, living in poverty on benefits alone, and argued Lowell should have written off her debt or accepted long-term token payments given her vulnerability. The ombudsman found that Lowell's contact (approximately 17 communications over 13 months) was reasonable in frequency and factual in tone, and that Lowell were entitled to check if her circumstances had changed. The ombudsman declined to direct debt write-off because Miss B had not provided sufficient evidence that she would never be able to work again, and found no unfair treatment overall.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman assessed whether Lowell's contact was reasonable in frequency and tone, finding approximately 17 communications over 13 months (less than two per month) to be reasonable. The ombudsman noted that token payments are not generally expected to be long-term arrangements, and Lowell were entitled to check if Miss B's circumstances had changed. The ombudsman declined to direct debt write-off because Miss B had not provided sufficient evidence that she would never be able to work again, which is a key factor for write-off consideration. The ombudsman applied a fair and reasonable standard rather than making formal findings on Equality Act breaches, and found the letters to be factual in nature rather than threatening.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website