Not upheld: Section 75 connected lender liability (misrepresentation and breach of contract claims); unfair credit relationship under Section 140A CCA complaint against Clydesdale Financial Services Limited trading as Barclays Partner Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W purchased timeshare fractional club membership in September 2013 financed by the Lender with £18,016 credit. In July 2023, over nine years later, Mr W raised complaints alleging misrepresentation by the Supplier at the time of sale and breach of contract regarding holiday availability. The Lender rejected all complaints. The Ombudsman found the misrepresentation claim time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980 (six-year limitation period) and the breach of contract claim unsupported by evidence, as sales paperwork explicitly stated holiday availability was subject to demand. The complaint was not upheld, and no compensation was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The Ombudsman applied the Limitation Act 1980 to determine that Section 75 claims for misrepresentation were time-barred, as more than six years had elapsed between the time of sale (10 September 2013) and when the claim was first notified to the Lender (5 July 2023). For the breach of contract claim regarding holiday availability, the Ombudsman found insufficient evidence that the Supplier had breached the Purchase Agreement, as the sales paperwork explicitly stated that availability was subject to demand, particularly at peak times. Therefore, the Lender was not liable under Section 75 for either misrepresentation or breach of contract.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website