Not upheld: Rejection of Section 75 Consumer Credit Act claim; alleged misrepresentation and breach of contract by timeshare supplier complaint against Clydesdale Financial Services Limited, trading as Barclays Partner Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Mr V purchased Fractional Club timeshare membership in April 2017 using finance from the Lender and repaid the loan by May 2019. In August 2025, over six years later, Mr V made a Section 75 claim against the Lender alleging the Supplier had misrepresented the membership as an investment and breached the Purchase Agreement. The Lender rejected the claim as out of time. The ombudsman found the claim was made outside the six-year limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980 and that the Lender acted fairly in rejecting it. The ombudsman also found no evidence of breach of contract by the Supplier. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the six-year limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980 to the Section 75 claim. Since Mr V first notified the Lender of his claim on 22 August 2025, more than six years after the Time of Sale on 13 April 2017, the claim was time-barred. The ombudsman found it neither unfair nor unreasonable for the Lender to reject a claim made so long after the cause of action accrued. The ombudsman rejected Mr V's argument that the limitation period should be extended under Section 32 of the Limitation Act, finding no evidence of deliberate concealment. Regarding the breach of contract claim, the ombudsman found insufficient evidence that the Supplier had breached the Purchase Agreement, as Mr V had not demonstrated he was no longer a member or unable to use his membership.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website