Not upheld: Irresponsible lending complaint against PDL Finance Limited trading as Mr Lender
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6390700 of 2026-06-18T00:00:00+00:00. Irresponsible lending complaint against PDL Finance Limited trading as Mr Lender. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6390700 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-18T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | PDL Finance Limited trading as Mr Lender |
| Product | Payday / short-term credit |
| Claim type | Irresponsible lending |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The complaint was not upheld. The ombudsman encouraged Miss W to contact PDL Finance to work out an affordable repayment plan if she remained in financial difficulty and reminded PDL Finance of its obligation to treat customers in difficulty fairly. |
Summary
Miss W complained that PDL Finance irresponsibly lent her £200 in April 2025, arguing that adequate affordability checks were not carried out and the loan was unaffordable given her financial circumstances. PDL Finance conducted checks based on Miss W's declared income of £1,293, estimated outgoings of £1,011, and credit file information showing no concerning patterns, concluding she had £282 monthly disposable income. The ombudsman found the checks were proportionate given the small loan size, short three-month term, and modest repayments, and that PDL Finance reasonably relied on the information provided. The complaint was not upheld, though the ombudsman noted Miss W's concerns about post-complaint handling would need to be raised separately with PDL Finance.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied the FOS's general approach to irresponsible lending complaints, focusing on whether PDL Finance carried out proportionate checks and lent responsibly. Given the loan was relatively small (£200), had a short three-month term, modest monthly repayments (largest £133.91), and Miss W had £282 monthly disposable income after all outgoings, proportionate checks were reasonable. The credit search revealed no red flags suggesting unsustainable borrowing patterns. Although Miss W claimed her actual financial situation was worse than disclosed, the ombudsman found PDL Finance reasonably relied on the information provided and had no reason to suspect the information was unrepresentative. The loan repayments were affordable on a pounds-and-pence basis and there was no indication Miss W would need to borrow further to meet repayments.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| PDL Finance Limited trading as Mr Lender, all decisions | 4 | 12% |
| Irresponsible lending, all decisions | 30,675 | 37% |
| Payday / short-term credit, all decisions | 9,917 | 50% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website