Catalogue accounts can feel different from other forms of borrowing. There is no bank branch involved, no formal loan meeting, and no sitting across a desk signing documents. You apply online for a fashion, homeware or retail credit account, get a credit limit, and start shopping. The monthly statements arrive. You pay the minimum. The balance barely moves. Before long, something that started as a convenient way to buy a sofa, school clothes or household items can quietly become a debt that follows you around for years.

This is a common form of consumer credit in the UK, but many people do not realise that catalogue debt can be challenged where the lender failed to lend responsibly. If the lender did not properly assess whether the credit was affordable before approving the account or significantly increasing your limit, the debt may not be entirely your responsibility.

How catalogue credit actually works

Catalogue accounts, offered by retailers and credit providers such as Very, Littlewoods, Next, JD Williams and others, are usually a form of running-account or revolving credit. You are given a spending limit, you buy goods, and you repay over time.

The catch is the cost of borrowing. Catalogue credit can carry high representative APRs, often around 30% to 45% depending on the provider, product and promotional terms. That is usually much higher than many mainstream personal loans and can be higher than some credit cards.

The minimum monthly payment on a catalogue account is often set low, sometimes as a small percentage of the outstanding balance or a fixed minimum amount. This keeps your payments manageable in the short term, but it can mean the balance reduces slowly if you only pay the minimum. Interest can continue to build, and a £2,000 catalogue balance at a high APR can take years to clear if you do not make larger repayments.

Lenders know that revolving credit can be profitable when customers carry balances over time. That does not automatically make the product unlawful. But it does mean lenders have to be careful about whether the credit is affordable and sustainable for the customer, not just whether the customer is likely to make some payments.

What lenders were required to do before approving you

Under the FCA’s Consumer Credit sourcebook, known as CONC, catalogue credit providers and other regulated lenders must carry out a reasonable and proportionate creditworthiness assessment before entering into a regulated credit agreement. Affordability is a key part of that assessment.

In practical terms, the lender should have considered enough information to decide whether you could afford to repay the credit in a sustainable way. Depending on the circumstances, this could include your income, existing credit commitments, essential outgoings, repayment history, credit file data and any signs of financial difficulty.

A lender who saw multiple missed payments, defaults, heavy existing borrowing or active high-cost credit on your file, and still approved a new high-interest catalogue account without further checks, may have a difficult case to make that its assessment was adequate.

The specific failure most often seen in catalogue credit is the credit limit increase. Many people were approved for a modest initial limit, perhaps £200 or £300, and then found that limit raised over time. A significant increase in a running-account credit limit requires a fresh creditworthiness assessment. Repeated smaller increases can also become a problem where, taken together, they significantly increase the amount of credit available.

If those checks were not carried out properly, the increases may have been irresponsible. For more on how this affordability obligation works across different credit types, our article on car finance affordability checks and when lenders should have said no explains the framework in detail. The same broad responsible lending principles apply to catalogue accounts.

Signs that your catalogue account may have been irresponsibly managed

Not every catalogue debt involves irresponsible lending. But if any of the following applied to your situation, it is worth looking more carefully at whether the lender met its obligations.

You were already in financial difficulty when you were approved. If your credit file showed missed payments, defaults, existing high-cost credit, payday loans or heavy use of other revolving credit when you applied, a reasonable lender should have questioned whether adding a new catalogue credit line was appropriate.

Your credit limit was increased repeatedly without proper checks. Automatic or repeated limit increases can be a warning sign, especially where your financial position had not improved. A lender should not keep expanding credit without considering whether the higher limit is affordable and sustainable.

You were paying only the minimum each month and the lender kept increasing your limit anyway. Regular minimum payments can suggest that a customer is not making meaningful progress in reducing the balance. If the lender’s own records showed you were only just managing the account, further limit increases may be difficult to justify.

You used catalogue credit for essentials rather than occasional purchases. If the account was being used to cover essential household items because you had no spare cash, that can support an argument that the credit was not affordable. Bank statements from the time may help show the wider picture.

You had multiple catalogue accounts open at the same time. Some customers found themselves with accounts at Very, Next, Littlewoods, JD Williams and other providers simultaneously. Each lender should have considered the other credit commitments visible on your credit file before approving more borrowing or raising your limit.

The add-on products problem

Catalogue accounts have often been sold alongside add-on products or extra credit features, such as payment protection insurance, extended warranties, shopping insurance, account cover, or buy now, pay later arrangements.

Some buy now, pay later catalogue offers can become expensive if the balance is not cleared within the promotional period. Depending on the terms, interest may then be charged or added in a way that customers did not fully understand when they placed the order.

If these products were added to your account without clear explanation, without proper assessment of whether they were suitable for your circumstances, or with terms that were not made transparent at the point of sale, they may form a separate basis for complaint.

The same pattern of unclear add-ons has been seen across consumer finance products more broadly. Our article on add-on products in car finance and how they were mis-sold covers how extra products were sometimes attached to credit agreements without adequate explanation, and how similar issues can arise across different types of consumer credit.

What you can claim back

If a catalogue lender failed to carry out a proper creditworthiness and affordability assessment, either at the initial application stage or when significantly increasing your credit limit, you may be entitled to redress.

A refund of interest and charges paid. Where credit should not have been granted, or where the limit should not have been increased, a successful complaint may result in a refund of the interest and charges applied to the unaffordable borrowing.

Statutory interest on top. The Financial Ombudsman Service may award 8% simple interest per year on refunded amounts in appropriate cases, calculated from the date each payment was made. This is not automatic in every case, but it can add a meaningful sum where an account ran for several years.

Removal of adverse credit markers. If the catalogue debt led to missed payments, arrears or defaults on your credit file, a successful complaint may result in those markers being amended or removed where they relate to lending that should not have been provided.

Write-off or reduction of any outstanding balance. If you still owe money on an account that was irresponsibly managed, the outstanding balance may be reduced or written off as part of the outcome. The exact result depends on the facts, the borrowing history and what redress is considered fair.

How to build your complaint

The strongest complaints are supported by clear evidence of what your financial position looked like when the account was opened or when the credit limit was increased. Focus on gathering the following.

Request your data from the lender. A Subject Access Request under UK data protection law can help you obtain the personal data the lender holds about you. This may include application details, credit checks, account notes, payment history, limit increase records and internal decision data. This can be one of the most useful documents in an irresponsible lending case because it shows what the lender knew, or should have considered, at the time.

Get your credit report. Your credit file can show existing borrowing, missed payments, defaults, payday loans and other commitments. If you still have old credit reports from the relevant period, keep them. If not, your current report and lender data may still help build the wider picture.

Gather bank statements. Statements from the relevant period can show your income, essential spending, existing debt repayments and whether you were already struggling. They are particularly useful if they show that you were using credit to cover everyday essentials or regularly spending close to your limit.

Keep account statements and letters. Catalogue statements, arrears notices, default letters, credit limit increase notices and promotional emails can all help show how the account was managed.

Our article on what evidence helps a missold car finance claim covers the evidence-gathering process in detail. The same basic principles apply to catalogue credit complaints, and it is worth reading before you begin.

The complaint process

Submit a formal written complaint to the lender, setting out clearly why you believe the account was irresponsibly managed. Specify whether your concern relates to the initial approval, subsequent limit increases, add-on products, or all of those issues.

State what redress you are seeking. This is typically a refund of interest and charges, removal or amendment of adverse credit markers, and a reduction or write-off of any remaining balance where appropriate.

For most financial complaints, the lender has up to 8 weeks to send a final response. If the lender rejects your complaint, does not respond within 8 weeks, or offers less than you believe is fair, you can usually refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service free of charge. After a final response, you normally have 6 months to take the complaint to the Ombudsman.

For more on how the formal complaint escalation process works, our article on the car finance complaint process: dealer vs lender vs broker sets out the mechanics clearly. The same broad steps apply across many regulated consumer credit complaints.

Working with no win no fee claims specialists means the process is handled for you from start to finish, with no upfront cost.

Other claims worth considering at the same time

Catalogue debt is rarely an isolated problem. If you were in the kind of financial difficulty that meant a catalogue account was irresponsibly extended to you, there may be other products in your history worth looking at.

Payday loan claims UK follow a similar irresponsible lending framework. If you had payday loans active at the same time as your catalogue account, each of those lenders may also have failed to carry out proper affordability checks. They can be complained about separately.

If you have taken out car finance that was not properly explained, particularly where a hidden or unfair commission arrangement may have affected the deal, mis sold pcp claims are separate and can be pursued alongside any catalogue debt complaint.

If you are a tenant in a rented property with unresolved maintenance issues, disrepair claims operate independently of any financial claim and can be pursued at the same time. And if you have ever been the victim of financial fraud, our scam recovery service is available on the same No Win, No Fee terms.

FAQs: Catalogue debt and irresponsible lending

Does it matter which catalogue company the account was with?

No. The responsible lending and creditworthiness rules apply to FCA-regulated consumer credit providers, including catalogue and retail credit lenders. Whether your account was with Very, Next, JD Williams, Littlewoods or another regulated provider, the same broad rules apply.

What if I made all my payments on time — can I still claim?

Yes. Making payments on time does not automatically mean the credit was affordable. You may have cut back on essentials, borrowed elsewhere, or fallen behind on other debts to keep the catalogue account up to date. The question is whether the lending was affordable and sustainable based on your financial position at the time.

Can I claim for multiple catalogue accounts?

Yes. Each account is assessed separately. If you had several catalogue accounts with different lenders, and each lender failed to check affordability properly, you can pursue separate complaints for each one.

What if the company has changed its name or the debt has been sold?

You can still complain. In many cases, the original lender remains responsible for the lending decision and any credit limit increases it made, even if the debt was later sold to a debt purchaser. If the complaint is about later debt collection conduct, the current debt owner may also be relevant. If you are unsure who to complain to, a claims specialist can help identify the correct party.

How far back can I go?

The general Financial Ombudsman time limit is 6 years from the event you are complaining about, or, if later, 3 years from when you became aware, or ought reasonably to have become aware, that you had cause to complain. You should not assume an older account is out of time without checking the facts, especially if you only recently realised the lending may have been irresponsible.

Does it cost anything to find out whether I have a case?

No. Claim First operates on a strict No Win, No Fee basis. There are no upfront fees, and nothing is payable unless your claim succeeds. Getting your case assessed is free.

The debt might not be entirely your responsibility

If a lender gave you credit you could not afford, whether at the outset or by raising your limit while you were already struggling, the responsibility for the debt that followed may not rest entirely with you. That is what irresponsible lending means in a legal context, and it is exactly what the complaint process exists to address.

Claim First is a UK-based, FCA-authorised claims management team. We handle irresponsible lending complaints, including catalogue credit accounts, on a strict no win no fee claims basis. No upfront costs, no hidden charges, and nothing to pay unless your claim succeeds.

Start your claim today — it takes just a few minutes online, and we will handle everything from there.