Not upheld: Section 75 claim rejection, irresponsible lending, unlicensed credit broker, undisclosed commission complaint against Clydesdale Financial Services Limited trading as Barclays Partner Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Ms C complained that a lender had failed to honour a Section 75 claim relating to a timeshare purchase financed in January 2010, alleging misrepresentation about holiday booking availability and undisclosed checks. She also complained of irresponsible lending, unlicensed credit brokering, and undisclosed commission. The complaint was made in December 2024, approximately 14 years after the purchase. The ombudsman found the misrepresentation claim time-barred under the six-year limitation period, the irresponsible lending complaint unsupported by evidence of unaffordability, the credit broker properly licensed, and no commission paid. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The Section 75 misrepresentation claim was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980, as the cause of action accrued in January 2010 and the claim was not notified until December 2024, well beyond the six-year limitation period. Section 32 of the Limitation Act did not apply as Ms C would have discovered the alleged misrepresentation close to the time of sale. For irresponsible lending, without evidence that the Credit Agreement was actually unaffordable to Ms C, the complaint could not be upheld. The Supplier held a valid OFT credit broking license during the relevant period. No commission was paid by the Lender to the Supplier; instead, the Supplier paid the Lender to subsidise the interest rate.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website