Lender Rejected Your Complaint — What To Do
A rejection from the lender is not the end of the road. Lenders reject many unaffordable lending complaints that the Financial Ombudsman later upholds. Their rejection letter is their opinion of the case, not an independent ruling. If you think the lending was unaffordable and the rejection does not address your evidence properly, the next step is to refer to FOS — which is free, independent, and frequently takes a different view.
Check your agreements on Recoup, our claim partner’s site
Why lenders reject complaints they go on to lose
Lenders apply their own internal standard at the complaint stage. Often that standard is “did our checks technically pass our own criteria at the time?” — which is a narrower test than the one FOS applies. The Financial Ombudsman uses a two-stage test:
- Were the checks reasonable and proportionate to the circumstances? And
- If proper checks had been carried out, would they have shown the lending was unaffordable?
The second stage is decisive in many cases. A lender can correctly say “we did the checks our process required” while still losing at FOS, because proper checks would have shown the lending was unaffordable. That is why rejection is far from final.
Step 1: read the final response carefully
The lender’s final response will explain why they have rejected the complaint. Read it for:
- What checks they say they carried out.
- What they say those checks showed.
- How they have addressed the specific points you raised.
- Whether they have engaged with your bank statements and credit file evidence at all.
- Anything factually wrong about the account history or your circumstances.
A rejection that is generic, that doesn’t engage with your evidence, or that gets basic facts wrong is a particularly weak position. Those are the rejections FOS most often overturns.
Step 2: decide whether to push back to the lender first
You don’t have to — you can go straight to FOS — but in some cases a follow-up to the lender clarifying specific points before referring is worthwhile. Particularly where:
- The lender has clearly missed important evidence you provided.
- There is a factual error in their account of the history.
- You have new evidence that strengthens the case (a recently produced bank statement, additional credit-file information).
A short, polite follow-up sometimes produces a revised offer. If it doesn’t, the FOS route remains open.
Step 3: refer to the Financial Ombudsman
You have six months from the date of the final response to refer the complaint to FOS. Past that deadline, FOS generally cannot help (unless exceptional circumstances apply). To refer:
- Use the FOS online complaint form, by phone, or in writing.
- Provide the lender’s final response and your original complaint.
- Provide your supporting evidence — bank statements, credit file, your narrative.
- Explain why you disagree with the lender’s rejection.
What to expect at FOS
A typical FOS investigation:
- Acknowledgement of the referral, with a case reference.
- A wait — sometimes substantial — for an investigator to be allocated, given FOS’s ongoing backlog.
- A review of the lender’s file (which FOS obtains directly) and your evidence.
- An investigator’s view, sometimes called an “adjudication” — non-binding, with both sides able to accept or push for an Ombudsman decision.
- If either side rejects, an Ombudsman issues a final decision, binding on the lender if accepted.
How often FOS upholds rejected complaints
FOS regularly publishes uphold rates. For unaffordable lending complaints, uphold rates have historically been high — particularly for high-cost credit, doorstep loans, guarantor lending and catalogue credit, where uphold rates of 60–80% have been recorded for periods. That doesn’t mean every complaint succeeds — but it does mean a lender’s rejection is far from a reliable signal of how FOS will rule.
What to do if FOS also rejects
If the investigator’s view goes against you, you can ask for an Ombudsman decision. If the Ombudsman’s final decision also goes against you and you accept it, the matter ends at FOS. You remain free to pursue a court claim — typically under Section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act — but a FOS decision is a relevant fact in any later litigation, and court claims are slower and carry costs risk.
Section 140A and the unfair relationship test.
Related guides
- Escalating to the Ombudsman
- How the Financial Ombudsman handles unaffordable lending complaints
- The 8-week response rule
- Section 140A and the unfair relationship test
- How a claim works step by step
Check If You Could Be Owed Compensation
You may be eligible to complain if a lender gave you credit you couldn’t afford. Start a free check in minutes — no paperwork needed. No win, no fee if you choose to proceed.
