Not upheld: Section 75 Consumer Credit Act claim - alleged breach of contract in supply and installation of garage complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Tesco Bank)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H complained that Tesco Bank failed to refund a payment made via credit card for a garage installation contract with supplier C. After the old garage was dismantled, issues arose including alleged water ingress, and Mr H raised a Section 75 Consumer Credit Act claim. Tesco declined to uphold the claim, requesting independent expert evidence due to conflicting accounts between Mr H and C regarding on-site discussions and what was communicated about risks. The ombudsman found that Tesco's position was not unreasonable given the conflicting narratives and lack of conclusive evidence, and that requesting expert opinion was a fair approach. The complaint was not upheld, though Mr H was advised he could continue to engage with Tesco if he obtained further evidence.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that given the significantly conflicting accounts between Mr H and C regarding key aspects of what happened, and the lack of expert evidence, it was not unreasonable for Tesco to request independent expert opinion before determining whether a breach of contract occurred. The ombudsman noted that neither Tesco nor the ombudsman could know exactly what was discussed on-site, and that Tesco is not a professional body with expertise in garage structures. The ombudsman also found that even if a breach had been evidenced, a full refund would not be proportionate as the supplier did fulfil the removal and provide the new garage, and there was no evidence the garage was entirely unfit for purpose.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website