Upheld: Other regulated complaint complaint against Hutchison 3G UK Limited trading as Three

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H complained that three fixed sum loan agreements totaling approximately £4,200 were taken out in his name in February 2024 without his knowledge or authorization. He discovered the monthly repayments approximately eight months later and suspected a third party who previously lived at his former address had fraudulently applied for the loans using his personal details. Three initially rejected his complaint, maintaining Mr H had authorized the borrowing. The ombudsman reviewed call recordings of the applications and found the voice differed from Mr H's voice in subsequent calls, and noted the devices were delivered to a former address using contact details not belonging to Mr H. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding Mr H did not authorize the loans and requiring Three to refund all repayments with interest, remove adverse credit information, and pay £350 compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that on balance of probabilities, Mr H did not make the loan applications himself based on voice analysis comparing application calls to subsequent calls with Three and the ombudsman. The use of a former address, non-Mr H email and telephone number for communications, and delivery of devices meant Mr H would not have been aware of the loans. The ombudsman concluded that a third party acted without Mr H's actual or apparent authority, and Mr H's explanation for not monitoring his account closely was credible given his personal circumstances.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website