Upheld: service failure leading to incorrect credit file reporting complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard)
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6416620 of 2026-06-15T00:00:00+00:00. service failure leading to incorrect credit file reporting complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard). Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6416620 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-15T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard) |
| Product | Credit card |
| Claim type | service failure leading to incorrect credit file reporting |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Barclaycard must: (1) amend the information reported to credit reference agencies so it does not show Mr H exceeded his credit limit in April 2025; (2) pay £150 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused |
Summary
Mr H complained that Barclaycard incorrectly amended his email address, preventing him from receiving notification that his credit card account had exceeded its £4,500 limit in April 2025 due to a £5.98 cash transaction fee. Barclaycard reported the over limit status to credit reference agencies and acknowledged multiple service failures. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding that Mr H would likely have paid money into the account if he had received the email alert, and therefore the over limit reporting would not have occurred. The ombudsman ordered Barclaycard to amend the credit file to remove the over limit marker and pay £150 compensation, rejecting Mr H's claim for higher compensation as there was insufficient evidence the marker caused financial loss.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Barclaycard's incorrect amendment of Mr H's email address was a service failure that prevented him from receiving an alert about exceeding his credit limit. The ombudsman was persuaded that Mr H would have paid money into the account if he had received the email alert, and therefore the over limit reporting would not have occurred but for Barclaycard's error. While the ombudsman acknowledged Mr H's evidence of financial consequences, there was insufficient evidence to prove the over limit marker caused financial loss, so compensation was limited to distress and inconvenience.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard), all decisions | 51 | 12% |
| Credit card, all decisions | 25,211 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website