Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Tandem Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T complained that Tandem Bank Limited was liable for misrepresentations made by a timeshare supplier when financing two holiday product purchases (Luxury Loyalty Nights for £5,880 in 2020 and Iconic Loyalty Nights for £7,420 in 2021) and for participating in an unfair credit relationship through a secret commission. Mr T alleged the supplier misrepresented accommodation quality, availability, booking ease, and future sale proceeds from earlier investments. The ombudsman found the complaint not upheld, determining that the alleged misrepresentations were either vague statements, technically true, or opinions rather than facts. The ombudsman noted the absence of direct testimony from Mr T despite repeated requests and found no evidence of any secret commission paid by the lender to the supplier.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the balance of probabilities standard and found insufficient persuasive evidence of actionable misrepresentation. Statements about booking being 'easy' were too vague to constitute false statements of fact. Claims about accommodation quality improvements were technically true as Mr T did gain access to higher tiers. Statements about future sale proceeds from Keys properties were opinions rather than facts, and there was insufficient evidence that the supplier could not reasonably have held those opinions at the time. The absence of direct testimony from Mr T, despite repeated requests, weakened the case. No commission was found to have been paid by the lender to the supplier. The ombudsman rejected the argument that a 2024 meeting showing incorrect predictions proved the supplier held false opinions in 2020-2021.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website