Not upheld: Irresponsible lending complaint against Manchester Credit Union Limited (MCUL)
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6344508 of 2026-06-23T00:00:00+00:00. Irresponsible lending complaint against Manchester Credit Union Limited (MCUL). Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6344508 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-23T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Manchester Credit Union Limited (MCUL) |
| Product | Personal loan |
| Claim type | Irresponsible lending |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman reminded MCUL of their responsibility to treat Mrs J with forbearance and due consideration should she reach out for further help. |
Summary
Mrs J complained that MCUL irresponsibly approved a £10,000 fixed sum loan in February 2025 despite her financial circumstances showing signs of financial distress and hardcore borrowing. MCUL conducted affordability checks using Open Banking data and partner's bank statements, verifying household income of £3,684 monthly and expenditure of £3,148 monthly, calculating £265 disposable income after the loan repayment. Mrs J's credit file showed no missed payments, defaults, or CCJs. The ombudsman found MCUL's checks were reasonable and proportionate, the lending decision was fair based on available information, and the calculated disposable income represented sustainable affordability. The complaint was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found MCUL's affordability checks were reasonable and proportionate. When initial checks showed high disposable income but limited essential expenditure verification, MCUL appropriately conducted further checks using the partner's bank statements to obtain a realistic picture of household expenditure. The calculated £265 monthly disposable income was considered reasonable for sustainable affordability. The credit file showed no signs of financial difficulty or credit reliance, and the stated purpose of the loan (car purchase) gave no indication of distress borrowing. The ombudsman rejected the argument that reliance on partner's income was unfair, as it provided a more realistic assessment of household circumstances.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Manchester Credit Union Limited (MCUL), all decisions | 1 | 0% |
| Irresponsible lending, all decisions | 30,675 | 37% |
| Personal loan, all decisions | 23,643 | 29% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website