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

Decision detail

Summary

Mr P purchased a Fractional timeshare membership in July 2015 for £12,521 financed by Clydesdale Financial Services Limited, with repayment over 180 months. Over 10 years later in February 2026, he complained that the Supplier breached Regulation 14(3) by marketing the membership as an investment, that there were misrepresentations regarding holiday availability and financial returns, and that the credit relationship was unfair. The ombudsman found the Section 75 claim time-barred, rejected the breach of contract claim based on Mr P's extensive holiday usage, and concluded that even if Regulation 14(3) was breached, Mr P's primary motivation was the holidaying experience rather than financial gain, so the credit relationship was not unfair. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found the Section 75 claim was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980 as it was made more than six years after the cause of action accrued on 14 July 2015. Regarding the Section 140A unfair credit relationship claim, while the ombudsman acknowledged the Supplier may have breached Regulation 14(3) by marketing the membership as an investment, this did not render the credit relationship unfair because Mr P's primary motivation for purchase was the holidaying experience, not financial gain. The evidence of his extensive holiday usage and the non-contemporary nature of his later testimony about investment motivation undermined his claims. The ombudsman found no material breach of contract regarding holiday availability.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website