Personal Loan Decision Reference 2021-0253

Case OutcomeSubstantially upheld
Subject MatterPersonal Loan
Date21 July 2021
Conducts Complained OfIncorrect information sent to credit reference agency
Finantial SectorBanking
Decision Ref:
Product / Service:
Personal Loan
Conduct(s) complained of:
Incorrect information sent to credit reference
Substantially upheld
The Complainants entered into a loan agreement with the Provider in May 2016. The
Complainants missed a number of the repayments under the loan thereby causing arrears
to accrue on their loan account. These arrears were reported to the Irish Credit Bureau (ICB).
Primarily, the Complainants are dissatisfied with the manner in which the Provider reported
their loan to the ICB.
The Complainants’ Case
The Complainants explain that when applying for a mortgage loan they had to provide an
ICB credit report. When the First Complainant reviewed the credit report he noted that it
stated that his loan had been written off even though weekly payments were being made
towards the loan. The credit report also stated that the First Complainant owed €11,765.80
at June 2018. However, the correct amount outstanding was €7,433.32. When the matter
was raised with the Provider, the First Complainant “… was told that the loan was nothing.”
The Complainants state the Provider would not assist them as the loan was written off:
“[t]hey said it was written off in 2017 then it was changed to 2018.”
The First Complainant expressed his concern regarding the credit report in that he was
unable to apply for a mortgage loan due to the arrears recorded on the credit report. The
Complainants state that they were advised by the Provider that it was not their job to update
the credit report and this was a matter for the ICB.
- 2 -
When the First Complainant questioned this with the Provider he was told “… by
management and [the Provider] it was tough luck that they Update their reports on a weekly
basis and it was up to date.” The First Complainant points out that even when he showed
the Provider the updated credit report “… they didn’t want to know as far as they were
concerned they were right and I was wrong.”
The Complainants received a letter dated 5 February 2019 stating that the loan was €8,080
even though it was not due to be repaid for another 12 months “… and I still owed 8,000 in
arrears but my outstanding balance is 9,009!” The First Complainant states that he does not
understand this letter.
It is stated that the loan was written off in June 2018 “… with no phone call and when I asked
them about this they said they don’t have to have any communication with their customers!
… No line of communication was offered from June 2018 when a massive decision was made
to my credit history!” The First Complainant outlines that his payment receipt states that as
of 5 February 2019, there was only €7,480.00 outstanding on the loan which the First
Complainant finds very confusing.
The First Complainant acknowledges that due to the loss of his job he had to reduce his
repayments but states that he made an agreement with the Provider at the time, and from
June 2018, the First Complainant has been making the agreed repayments.
The Complainants explain that because the Provider will not update the relevant credit
report, they have been unable be get mortgage loan approval to purchase a home. The
Complainants have also placed a deposit on their prospective home and do not want to lose
it. The First Complainant states that there are 12 months left on the loan and now that he
has a job, he can repay the loan.
The Complainants have also set out in an email dated 23 March 2019 and two emails dated
1 April 2019, the poor customer service they say they received from the Provider. T hese
emails state that the Complainants were ignored, refused service and shouted at by staff
members; advised they were not welcome and told to leave the branch in public view. They
also assert that they were not provided with a complaint form when they requested one.
The Provider’s Case
The Provider advises that the loan was issued on a joint and several basis and was subject
to weekly repayments of €85. The Provider states that a reduced or alternative repayment
was never agreed or put in place. The Provider also submits it is not correct to say that it
only dealt with the First Complainant as communications were sent to the address of both

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT