Skip to the page Primary Navigation Skip to the page content Skip to page Footer
The OFT closed on 31 March 2014 and this website is no longer being updated. The OFT's work and responsibilities have passed to a number of different bodies. Read more.

Unfair relationships cases

This is a full list of unfair relationships cases.

This is a list of unfair relationships cases, of which the OFT is aware, up to January 2013.

Titles link to the relevant PDF in each case. Please note that these case summaries have been prepared for guidance only, and should not be relied upon as an accurate expression of the law.

Unfair relationships cases

No. Case name Date

  1

Nicol v Nine Regions
(Sheriffdom of North Strathclyde at Greenock)

12 September 2008

Type of agreement: Hire-purchase agreement with trust deed
Claim: Repayment of monies paid, return of ownership of vehicle
Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

  2

Nine Regions v Sadeer
(Bromley County Court)

14 November 2008

Type of agreement: Loan secured by bill of sale (£880, APR 384%)
Claim: Amount claimed unfair, APR too high, unreasonable charges added
Outcome: No unfair relationship

  3

Khodari v Tamimi
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division) 

18 December 2008

See also related appeal – Case 11

Type of agreement: 18 unsecured loans (total £1,125,000, interest 10%)
Claim: Amount disputed, money irrecoverable, agreement unenforceable because creditor not licensed, interest charge manifestly unfair
Outcome: No unfair relationship

  4

Milliken v Betterpace
(Cambridge County Court)

23 December 2008

Type of agreement: Four loans secured by bill of sale (total £32,000)
Claim: Overpaid creditor, bill of sale not registered, interest rate miscalculated and not properly set out, agreement improperly executed
Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

  5

Nine Regions v Singh
(Leeds County Court) 

14 January 2009

Type of agreement: Three loans (interest 7% pm, APR 214%)
Claim: Interest rate extortionate and unfair, misrepresentation
Outcome: No unfair relationship  

  6

Maple Leaf  v Rouvroy 
(Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court) 

19 February 2009

Type of agreement: Funding agreement (€30 million
Claim: Agreement not enforceable, terms unfair and not binding
Outcome: No unfair relationship

  7

Morrison v Betterpace
(Lowestoft County Court) 

1 September 2009

Type of agreement: Two loans secured by bill of sale (APR 343%, 485%)
Claim: Prevent recovery of vehicle, discharge sum payable, alter terms of agreement to enable settlement of arrears by affordable instalments
Outcome: Unfair relationship under s140A
Order made: Reduce interest rate, limit number of default letters

  8

MBNA v Thorius
(Newcastle-upon-Tyne County Court) 

21 September 2009 

Type of agreement: Credit card agreement with PPI
Claim: PPI not agreed, unable to terminate PPI, unfair terms, failure to disclose commission, failure to comply with s78(1)
Outcome: No ruling of unfair relationship (but potential unfairness)

9

Shaw v Nine Regions
(Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Court) 

23 September 2009 

See also related appeal – Case 14

Type of agreement: Loan secured by bill of sale (£3,000, APR 342%)
Claim: Unfair terms, unfair exercise of rights under agreement, bill of sale not properly executed
Outcome: Unfair relationship under s140A
Order made: Reduce sum payable by borrower

10

McGuffick v Royal Bank of Scotland
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court) 

6 October 2009 

Type of agreement: Unsecured loan (£17,034)
Claim: Agreement unenforceable due to breach of s77, injunction to restrain creditor from reporting non-payment to credit reference agencies
Outcome: No unfair relationship

11

Tamimi v Khodari (appeal)
(Court of Appeal, Civil Division) 

8 October 2009 

See also related judgment – Case 3

Type of agreement : See case 3
Claim: Judge wrongly declined to accede to original arguments
Outcome: No unfair relationship

12

Blemain v Bentley
(High Court)

28 October 2009

Type of agreement: Secured loan (£49,000)
Claim: Unfair relationship, failed to assess ability to repay, took advantage
Outcome: No ruling of unfair relationship (but potential unfairness)

 13

Patel v Patel
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division) 

10 December 2009

Type of agreement: Unsecured loans (total £56,450, interest 20% pa)
Claim: Agreements not legally binding, discharge or reduce sum payable
Outcome: Unfair relationship under s140A
Order made: Reduce sum payable by borrower

 14

Shaw v Nine Regions (appeal)   
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division) 

18 December 2009

See also related judgment – Case 9

Type of agreement: See case 9
Claim: Interest rate unfair and extortionate
Outcome: No unfair relationship

 15

Carey v HSBC Bank
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Manchester District Registry Mercantile Court) 

23 December 2009

Type of agreement: Credit card agreements
Claim: Preliminary issues including whether breach of s78(1) or failure to supply copy agreement gives rise to unfair relationship
Outcome: No unfair relationship

 16

Tew v BoS & Barclays
(High Court of Justice, Chancery Division) 

22 January 2010 

Type of agreement: Shared appreciation mortgages
Claim: Unfair terms, unfair relationship
Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship 

 17

Roach v Black Horse
(Basildon County Court) 

23 February 2010 

Type of agreement: Loan with PPI
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI, unfair relationship
Outcome: Unfair relationship under s140A
Order made: Not known

 18

Soulsby v FirstPlus 
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division,
Leeds District Registry Mercantile List) 

5 March 2010 

Type of agreement: Three loans with PPI (third loan for £95,000 with PPI of £23,387 secured on borrowers' house)
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI, misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty
Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

 19

Wollerton v Black Horse
(Leicester County Court) 

26 March 2010 

Type of agreement: Unsecured loan (£17,385 plus £3,601 PPI)
Claim: Debt unenforceable (TCC mis-stated), mis-selling of PPI, PPI terms placed excessive and unfair burden
Outcome: No finding of unfair relationship (but potential unfairness) 

 20

Barons Finance v Olubisi
(Mayor's and City of London Court) 

26 April 2010 

Type of agreement: Secured loan (£2,950, interest 3.5% pm)
Claim: Agreement not properly executed, interest rate usuriously high, exploitation of borrower’s vulnerability and lack of understanding
Outcome: Unfair relationship under s140A
Order made: Set aside order for possession  

 21

Yates v Nemo Personal Finance
(Manchester County Court) 

 14 May 2010

Type of agreement: Secured loan (£60,500 plus £15,468 PPI)
Claim: Unfair relationship, breach of fiduciary duty, non-disclosure of commission, part agreement improperly executed
Outcome: Unfair relationship under s140A
Order made: PPI part of agreement to be rescinded

 22

Mannion v Nine Regions
(Oxford County Court) 

18 May 2010 

Type of agreement: Two loans secured by bills of sale (2nd for £1,538)
Claim: Agreements unenforceable, bills of sale void, credit bargains extortionate or unfair
Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

23

Consolidated Finance v Hunter
(Macclesfield County Court)

1 July 2010

Type of agreement: Secured loan repayable within 90 days to annul bankruptcy Claim: Misrepresentation, unfair relationship
Outcome: No unfair relationship

24

Harrison v Black Horse
(Worcester County Court)

 19 July 2010

See also related judgments – Case 33 and Case 42

Type of agreement : Two loans (2nd for £60,000 plus £10,200 PPI)
Claim: Unfair relationship due to large commission, limited length of PPI and cost of PPI, negligence, breach of statutory duty
Outcome: No unfair relationship

 25

Black Horse v Speak
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Manchester District Registry Mercantile Court) 

21 July 2010 

Type of agreement : Loan (£5,000 plus £2,012 PPI)
Claim: Agreement unenforceable (TCC mis-stated), misrepresentation, breach of statutory duty, mis-selling of PPI
Outcome: No unfair relationship

26

James v Black Horse
(Manchester County Court)

16 September 2010

Type of agreement: Loan with PPI
Claim: Breach of fiduciary relationship
Outcome: No unfair relationship

 27

Vernalls v Black Horse
(Oxford County Court)

4 November 2010

Type of agreement: Loan with PPI
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI
Outcome: No unfair relationship

28

Snailham & Elliot v Black Horse
(Barnsley County Court)

2010

Type of agreement: Loan with PPI
Claim: PPI compulsory, breach of ICOBS, unfair relationship
Outcome: No unfair relationship

29

Morris v Black Horse
(Barnsley County Court)

2010

Type of agreement: Loan with PPI
Claim: Unfair relationship because told that PPI was compulsory
Outcome: No unfair relationship

30

Kerry v Black Horse
(Chesterfield County Court)

25 November 2010

Type of agreement: Secured loan (£18,000) with PPI (£7,753)
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI, breach of ICOBS
Outcome: No unfair relationship

31

Paragon v Hyah
(court unknown)

29 November 2010

No details

32

Woodward v Black Horse
(Warrington County Court)

30 November 2010

Type of agreement: Loan (£3,500) with PPI (£1,573)
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI, condition of loan, breach of ICOBS, unfair relationship Outcome: No unfair relationship

 33

Harrison v Black Horse (appeal)
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Mercantile Court) 

1 December 2010

See also related judgments – Case 24 and Case 42

Type of agreement : See case 24
Claim: Previous judge did not take account of all relevant factors
Outcome: No unfair relationship

34

Buckingham v Black Horse
(Birmingham County Court)

3 February 2011

Type of agreement: Secured loan (£13,000) with PPI (£6,996)
Claim: Breach of fiduciary duty, failure to disclose commission, misrepresentation Outcome: No unfair relationship

35

Lawson v Black Horse
(Newcastle County Court)

15 April 2011

 No details

36

Conlon v Black Horse
(Manchester County Court)

3 May 2011

See also related appeal – Case 56

Type of agreement: Secured loan with PPI
Claim: Non-disclosure of PPI commission
Outcome: Unfair relationship under s140A
Order made: Giving borrower the relief sought

37

HFC Bank v Shaw
(Clerkenwell & Shoreditch County Court)

May 2011

See also related appeal – Case 50

Type of agreement: Loan (£15,000).
Claim: Unfair relationship
Outcome: No unfair relationship

 38

Barnes v Black Horse
(High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Mercantile Court)

31 May 2011

Type of agreement : Three unsecured loans (3rd plus £2,694 PPI)
Claim: Breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, breach of contract, agreements unenforceable, unfair relationship
Outcome: No ruling of unfair relationship (but potential unfairness)

39

Capital Mortgage v Smith
(Cardiff County Court)

16 June 2011

See also related appeal – Case 51

Type of agreement: Secured loan (£297,500, interest 2.75% pm)
Claim: Unfair relationship, breach of Article 8 ECHR, ulterior motive
Outcome: No unfair relationship

40

Bevin v Datum
(Bournemouth County Court)

5 July 2011

See also related appeal – Case 45

Type of agreement:  Facility letters to fund acquisition of properties Claim: Monthly interest rate 1.25% (compounded), penalty rate 3% Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

41

Paragon v McEwan-Peters
(High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Commercial Court)

5 October 2011

Type of agreement: Mortgage loans to finance buy-to-let properties
Claim: Equitable estoppels, enforcement of rights was unfair
Outcome: No unfair relationship

 42

Harrison v Black Horse appeal
(Court of Appeal)

13 October 2011

See also related judgments – Case 24 and Case 33

Type of agreement: See case 24
Claim: Non-disclosure of commission for sale of PPI
Outcome: No unfair relationship

43

Jones v Northern Rock
(Lincoln County Court)

13 October 2011

Type of agreement: Loan (£25,000) with PPI (£13,243)
Claim: Breach of ICOBS, unfair relationship
Outcome: No unfair relationship

44

Langley v Paragon
(Coventry County Court)

October 2011

Type of agreement: Secured loan (£52,000) with PPI (£18,200)
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI, unfair relationship
Outcome: No unfair relationship

 45

Bevin v Datum (appeal)
(High Court of Justice, Chancery Division)

15 December 2011

See also related judgment – Case 40

Type of agreement: See case 40
Claim: Monthly interest rate 1.25% (compounded), penalty rate 3%
Outcome: No ruling of unfair relationship (but potential unfairness)

46

Gillies v Black Horse
(Luton County Court)

19 December 2011

Type of agreement: Loan with PPI
Claim: Misrepresentation, breach of statutory duty, unfair relationship, negligence, breach of contract
Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

 47

Rahman v HSBC Bank
(High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Leeds District Registry)

17 January 2012

Type of agreement: Secured overdrafts and term loans (total £7.2m) Claim: Appointment of receivers invalid, relationship unfair due to terms of agreements (including cross default clause) and manner of enforcement
Outcome: No unfair relationship

48

Murray v Black Horse
(Carlisle County Court)

22 March 2012

Type of agreement: Hire-purchase agreement with PPI
Claim: PPI mis-sold (not discussed and did not ask for it or want it)
Outcome: No unfair relationship

49

Gray v Lloyds TSB
(Winchester County Court)

30 March 2012

Type of agreement: Loan with PPI
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI, misrepresentation, breach of ICOBS
Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

No details

50

HFC Bank v Shaw (appeal)
(Court of Appeal, Civil Division)

24 April 2012

See also related judgment – Case 37

Type of agreement: See case 37
Claim: Unfair relationship
Outcome: No unfair relationship

51

Capital Mortgage v Smith (appeal)
(Court of Appeal, Civil Division)

14 May 2012

See also related judgment – Case 39

Type of agreement: See case 39
Claim: Unfair relationship, breach of Article 8 ECHR, ulterior motive, interest rate Outcome: No unfair relationship

52

Loughlin v Black Horse
(court unknown)

May 2012

Type of agreement: Loan with PPI
Claim: Negligence, misrepresentation, breach of GISC Code, unfair relationship Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

53

Andrew v Barclays
(High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Manchester District Registry, Mercantile Court)

4 July 2012

Type of agreement: Loans with PPI
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI, unfair relationship
Outcome: No ruling on possible unfair relationship

54

Davies v Black Horse
(Liverpool County Court)

2 August 2012

Type of agreement: Secured loan (£10,000) with PPI (£4,583)
Claim: Mis-selling of PPI, breach of statutory duty, breach of ICOBS rules and FSA handbook, unfair relationship, agreement improperly executed
Outcome: No unfair relationship

55

Plevin v Paragon
(Manchester County Court)

4 October 2012

Type of agreement: Secured loan with PPI (£39,780, APR 7.3%)
Claim: Unfair relationship (misrepresentation, no proper advice, non-disclosure of commission, PPI unsuitable, misleading and unfair), unenforceable agreement Outcome: No unfair relationship

56

Conlon v Black Horse (appeal)
(High Court of Justice, Leeds District Registry)

7 November 2012

See also related judgment – Case 36

Type of agreement: See case 36
Claim: Non-disclosure of PPI commission
Outcome: No unfair relationship


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




Back to: Unfair relationships

Recently viewed pages

This feature requires Javascript and Cookies to be enabled on your browser

Email alerts

Register for email alerts or amend your existing account details here.