The Tribunal has handed down its decision in the case of Plexedes Chickombe and 44 others v the FCA and Clydesdale Financial Services Limited trading as Barclays Partner Finance (Clydesdale) as interested party. The case concerned consumer credit agreements that were entered into through an unauthorised broker. Clydesdale had discovered that 1,444 regulated credit agreements to finance the acquisition of timeshare accommodation had been brokered by an unauthorised broker in breach of FSMA. Because the agreements were made in consequences of something said or done by a third party in contravention of the FSMA general prohibition, the agreements were, under FSMA, unenforceable against the borrowers, who also had the right to recover money or property transferred to Clydesdale under the agreements. Clydesdale asked FCA to make a “validation order” on the basis it was just and equitable for the agreements to be enforced and money paid to be retained. FCA decided to validate the agreements for a number of reasons, including that there had been no customer detriment. Some borrowers, however, alleged in exercising their right to appeal the decision to the Tribunal, that there was detriment and raised the question as to whether the validation decision was reasonably open to FCA. Among the borrowers’ contentions were that they were pressurised into signing the agreements and were not given the time to read them, nor were the terms of the agreements explained to them. FCA was unaware of these allegations when it made its decision. The Tribunal decided that consumer detriment is a relevant factor to be taken into account when FCA decides whether to issue a validation order, and that FCA had acted unlawfully in fettering its discretion by the narrow manner in which it took into account evidence of consumer detriment. The Tribunal remitted the case to FCA for it to reconsider its decision, this time taking consumer detriment into account.
Popular tags
AI
AML
Bank of England
BoE
brexit
CMA
Commission
competition
complaints
consultation
Consumer Duty
consumer protection
Covid-19
crypto
Dear CEO
EBA
EIOPA
Enforcement
ESMA
EU
European Commission
FATF
FCA
fees
FOS
fraud
FSB
FSCS
HM Treasury
innovation
insurance
LIBOR
MiFID 2
MLR
OFSI
open banking
Payments
PRA
PRIIPS
PSR
sanctions
supervision
Treasury
Treasury Committee
UK Finance
Archives
- June 2026
- May 2026
- April 2026
- March 2026
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
