Not upheld: Section 75 Consumer Credit Act claim rejection / breach of contract complaint against Clydesdale Financial Services Limited, trading as Barclays Partner Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs M purchased two timeshare memberships from a Supplier in 2012 and 2015, financed by the Lender. After the Supplier entered administration in 2020, Mrs M claimed the Lender was liable under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act for breach of contract. The Lender rejected her claims. The ombudsman found that while Mrs M alleged breach of contract due to the Supplier's administration, she failed to provide sufficient evidence such as purchase agreements and documentation proving she held the memberships at liquidation and could no longer use them. Without such evidence, the ombudsman could not establish that a breach occurred and therefore did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Section 75 of the CCA provides connected lender liability for breaches of contract or actionable misrepresentation by suppliers. A Section 75 claim mirrors the claim a consumer could make against the supplier. Mrs M alleged the Supplier breached contract by entering administration in 2020, but she failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate this claim, such as purchase agreements and documentation showing she held the memberships at the time of liquidation and could no longer use them. Without such evidence, the ombudsman could not conclude that the Supplier breached the contracts or that the Lender was liable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website