Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Clydesdale Financial Services Limited trading as Barclays Partner Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs W complained that Clydesdale Financial Services Limited (trading as Barclays Partner Finance) acted unfairly by rejecting her Section 75 claims relating to a timeshare purchased in 2009 for £11,083 and by being party to an unfair credit relationship under Section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Mrs W alleged misrepresentations regarding holiday availability and investment potential, and claimed breach of contract. The ombudsman found the Section 75 claim was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980, as it was first raised on 5 July 2023, more than 6 years after Mrs W traded in the timeshare in 2013. The alleged misrepresentations were not substantiated by evidence. The Section 140A complaint was outside the ombudsman's jurisdiction. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Mrs W's Section 75 claim for breach of contract was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980, as more than 6 years had elapsed between when she traded in the timeshare in 2013 and when she first notified the Lender on 5 July 2023. It is reasonable for lenders to reject time-barred claims. Additionally, the alleged misrepresentation that the timeshare was an investment was not substantiated, as the Supplier was not selling fractional timeshares in 2009. The alleged breach regarding holiday availability was not proven, as the sales paperwork indicated availability was subject to demand. The Section 140A unfair credit relationship complaint was outside the ombudsman's jurisdiction as determined in a separate decision.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website