Not upheld: unfair credit relationship under section 140A CCA and connected lender liability under section 75 CCA complaint against Clydesdale Financial Services Limited (trading as Barclays Partner Finance)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H purchased a timeshare membership for £6,900 in May 2009 using finance from Clydesdale Financial Services Limited and made claims under section 75 (connected lender liability) and section 140A (unfair credit relationship) of the Consumer Credit Act in February 2024, over 14 years later. The ombudsman found the section 75 claim time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980 and rejected the section 140A claim due to lack of substantive evidence supporting allegations of pressure, inadequate affordability checks, or insufficient disclosure of ongoing costs. The ombudsman noted that the complainant failed to use the 14-day cooling off period and bore the burden of proving factual allegations, which he had not adequately discharged. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the section 75 claim was barred by the six-year limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980, as the misrepresentations and alleged breaches occurred in 2009 and the claim was not made until 2024. For the section 140A unfair credit relationship claim, the ombudsman found insufficient evidence to support allegations of pressure, inadequate affordability checks, or lack of information about ongoing costs. The ombudsman noted that the burden is on the complainant to substantiate factual allegations, not on the lender to disprove them. The ombudsman also found that Mr H's failure to use the 14-day cooling off period and his 14-year delay in raising the complaint undermined claims of pressure or unfairness at the point of sale.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website