Not upheld: treatment during financial hardship and enforcement of possession order complaint against Nationwide Building Society

Decision detail

Summary

Ms B complained to the FOS about how Nationwide Building Society handled her requests for help during financial hardship, particularly following an October 2024 agreement to work with her rather than enforce a possession order granted in 2021. The investigator found the agreement was not legally binding and NBS's actions were not unfair. Ms B requested ombudsman review. The ombudsman found that while NBS was mindful of Ms B's vulnerabilities in making the October 2024 agreement, after 20 months with no viable alternative solution in place, it was not unfair for NBS to lose confidence in a non-enforcement resolution. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman noted that the October 2024 agreement was made in the context of NBS having held a possession order for three years and being willing to give Ms B more time due to her circumstances. The phrase 'realistic and reasonable timescales' was not defined but the ombudsman considered it reasonable for NBS to monitor progress and assess whether a resolution was likely. After 20 months with no viable alternative in place, the ombudsman found it was not unfair or unreasonable for NBS to lose confidence in a non-enforcement resolution. The ombudsman emphasized that only a court can determine legal binding nature of agreements and that the FOS cannot force lenders to delay recovery action.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website