Upheld: irresponsible lending - inadequate affordability checks complaint against Marsh Finance & Commercial Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6401764 of 2026-06-15T00:00:00+00:00. irresponsible lending - inadequate affordability checks complaint against Marsh Finance & Commercial Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6401764 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-15T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Marsh Finance & Commercial Limited |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | irresponsible lending - inadequate affordability checks |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Marsh Finance must: (1) Refund all overpayments made by Mr B, adding 8% simple interest per year from the date of each overpayment to the date of settlement; (2) Remove any adverse information recorded on Mr B's credit file regarding the agreement. The ombudsman determined that Mr B should pay £367 per month for the 10 months of car usage (£3,670 total), which is less than the £3,974 deposit already paid, so Mr B is entitled to a refund of the difference. |
Summary
Mr B complained that Marsh Finance lent to him irresponsibly in January 2023 for a £22,000 car hire purchase agreement without conducting adequate affordability checks. Marsh Finance claimed to have verified Mr B's income of £30,317 via Open Banking and checked his credit file, but the ombudsman found the evidence provided was incomplete and insufficient. Upon reviewing Mr B's actual bank statements and credit report, the ombudsman determined that Mr B had only approximately £250 monthly disposable income after accounting for household expenses, credit commitments, tax obligations, and the £506 hire purchase payment, making the lending unsustainable. The ombudsman upheld the complaint and ordered Marsh Finance to refund overpayments with interest and remove adverse credit file information, with Mr B required to pay only £3,670 for 10 months of car usage.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Marsh Finance failed to carry out checks proportionate to Mr B's circumstances. Although the firm claimed to have verified income via Open Banking and checked the credit file, the evidence provided was insufficient and incomplete. The ombudsman reviewed Mr B's actual bank statements and credit report to determine what proportionate checks would have revealed: monthly income of £2,800, regular expenses of £1,870, tax obligations of £170, and after the £506 hire purchase payment, only £250 remaining for essential costs. This left no sustainable buffer and demonstrated the lending was irresponsible. The ombudsman rejected Marsh Finance's interpretation of their credit file data and concluded the firm could not reasonably have approved the lending had they conducted proper checks.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Marsh Finance & Commercial Limited, all decisions | 35 | 41% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 18,521 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website