Not upheld: irresponsible lending / affordability complaint against Inclusive Finance Limited trading as Creditspring

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained that Creditspring irresponsibly lent him £1,000 in June 2024 when he was already struggling financially. Creditspring had verified his income at £2,726 per month, obtained his expenditure details, checked his credit file (which showed no adverse information or missed payments), and estimated his disposable income at £1,310. The loan required maximum monthly payments of around £97. Although Mr B's actual financial situation was worse than his declarations suggested and included gambling issues, the ombudsman found Creditspring's checks were proportionate given the low repayments and lack of obvious financial difficulty indicators. The complaint was not upheld, and Creditspring's earlier offer to waive and refund membership fees was maintained.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied FCA CONC requirements, which require firms to carry out proportionate checks considering the individual circumstances. Given the low monthly repayments (around £97), the first arrangement nature of the loan, Mr B's declared disposable income of £1,310, verified income of £2,726, and the absence of adverse credit indicators (no missed payments, arrears, or signs of overindebtedness), the ombudsman found Creditspring's checks were proportionate. Although Mr B's actual financial situation was worse than his declarations suggested and included gambling issues, the ombudsman reasoned that reasonable and proportionate checks would not have extended to uncovering this information given the lack of obvious indicators in the data Creditspring obtained.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website