Not upheld: loan agreement administration; misinformation by credit intermediary regarding application of trade-in value complaint against Clydesdale Financial Services Limited, trading as Barclays Partner Finance (BPF)

Decision detail

Summary

Ms K complained that BPF's credit intermediary provided incorrect information about how her phone trade-in value would be applied, leading her to believe her existing loan would be settled and she would have only one new monthly payment. Instead, the trade-in value was deducted from the new loan, leaving her with two concurrent agreements. While the intermediary accepted the error and offered goodwill compensation, the ombudsman found that the written loan agreement Ms K signed clearly stated how the trade-in value would be applied, correcting the earlier misinformation. Since no financial loss occurred (both agreements were interest-free and the total repayment amount was the same), the ombudsman did not uphold the complaint and found no grounds to restructure the agreements.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Although the credit intermediary provided incorrect information about how the trade-in value would be applied, the written loan agreement that Ms K signed electronically clearly corrected this misinformation prior to her agreeing to the second loan. The ombudsman found no financial loss as both agreements were interest-free and Ms K repays the same total amount. It is reasonable to assume Ms K would have read the agreement carefully given it was a contractual agreement and the time she had previously spent asking about the trade-in value treatment. Therefore, there are no grounds to instruct BPF to restructure the loan agreements.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website