Upheld: unclear communication and misleading advice regarding payment obligations and credit reporting complaint against American Express Services Europe Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Miss M complained about how AESEL handled her personal and business credit card accounts after she missed payments in late 2025. She claimed AESEL representatives told her on the phone that they would not refer her to debt collectors or report adverse information, but the accounts were subsequently terminated, passed to a debt collection agency, and adverse information was reported to credit reference agencies. The ombudsman found that AESEL's communications were confusing and misleading, particularly regarding payment obligations and the consequences of non-payment. However, the ombudsman concluded that Miss M would not have been able to pay the required full balance of over £2,750 even with clearer information, and therefore the adverse reporting and debt collection referral would likely have occurred regardless. The complaint was upheld with £100 compensation awarded for the distress caused by unclear communication, but the ombudsman rejected requests to remove credit file markers or prevent further adverse reporting.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that AESEL's communications were confusing and misleading, particularly the first representative's promise to remove adverse information without explaining that the full balance was now payable and accounts had been terminated. However, the ombudsman concluded that even with clearer communication, Miss M would not have been able to pay the full balance of over £2,750 given her financial difficulties. Therefore, the adverse reporting and debt collection referral would likely have occurred regardless. The ombudsman rejected the argument that health issues should have been accommodated, as they were not disclosed to AESEL and therefore not reasonably foreseeable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website