Paymentsense Limited · DRN-5976505

The complaint A company which I’ll call ‘H’ complains that Paymentsense Limited trading as Dojo behaved unreasonably when charging it for services it didn’t use and a cancellation fee when it wanted to exit its agreement. The complaint is brought on H’s behalf by its director, Mr K. What happened Mr K told us: • In May 2025, a representative from Paymentsense offered H a ‘30 day no commitment trial’ for its services. He used high pressure tactic such as 9pm calls to push through the application. • Card terminals were delivered on 28 May 2025, but these weren’t used other than for a £0.01 test. He tried to cancel the agreement on 7 August 2025, but Paymentsense still continued to take monthly payments. • He’d contacted H’s bank and it refunded the payments which Paymentsense had claimed from July to September under the direct debt guarantee. However, Paymentsense said it was entitled to these payments, and it would issue collection proceedings to recover the outstanding payments which were due. • H had received confusing correspondence which was in the name of an unrelated company. Overall, Paymentsense’s service had been poor, and the termination charges it was claiming didn’t reflect the actual charges incurred as no transactions were actually taken. • He wanted Paymentsense to allow H to exit the contract for free, remove any adverse information it intended to apply and pay compensation for the inconvenience caused. Paymentsense told us: • It hadn’t received the cancellation request from H in August 2025 because the email hadn’t been sent to the correct email address. However, even if this had been received on 7 August 2025, that was outside the 30-day timescale for H to cancel its contract without paying the remainder of its contract. • The first 30 days service to H had been fee-free and it would have been able to end its agreement without an early closure fee had it done so within 30 days of the agreement being signed – but H had requested the cancellation well after the 30 days had passed. • Its terms and conditions and fee schedule were clear that regardless of usage, if the

-- 1 of 3 --

agreement is cancelled outside of 30 days of the agreement being signed, that early termination fees will apply and the contract is valid for the full twelve-month term. Therefore, it hadn’t done anything wrong in charging the applicable fees. • H’s agreement was yet to be cancelled as the company had refused to pay the termination fee until our service had provided an outcome. It had also stayed any collections activity whilst the complaint was being considered by our service. Our investigator didn’t recommend the complaint be upheld as she didn’t think Paymentsense had behaved unreasonably. She thought the agreement entered into by H was clear this was for twelve months, whether or not the terminal was used. She was satisfied H had sent its cancellation request to one of Paymentsense’s email addresses but didn’t think this made a difference as this had been after the 30-day free cancellation period had already expired. The investigator noted Paymentsense had now arranged for the collection of the terminals, but suggested H contact Paymentsense to arrange for the settlement of the outstanding balance on its account. H didn’t agree. It said enforcing the twelve-month term when it hadn’t used the service provided by Paymentsense was unfair. It said it had been mis-sold the agreement with a 30 day no commitment trial and had been pressured into taking this. It maintained that Paymentsense hadn’t incurred a loss as it had returned the card terminals and not used its services, so the termination fee was unreasonable. H maintained it should be able to exit without paying anything further, have any impact on its credit file from not making these payments corrected and it to be noted its account had been closed as though it were not in debt. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. Having done so, I’m sorry to disappoint Mr K but there’s not much more that I can add to what our investigator has already said. Mr K says H was mis-sold the agreement by Paymentsense as he was told there was a 30- day no commitment trial, and he was pressured into taking out the agreement. However, I’ve seen the terms of H’s agreement with Paymentsense which say, “we will not charge you an early account closure fee if you tell us you want to end the agreement within the first month of entering into it.” Here, H didn’t cancel its agreement within the first month and Paymentsense didn’t try to apply a closure fee, so I can’t say the agreement was mis-sold on this basis. Indeed, Mr K has told our service the first time he emailed Paymentsense to cancel the agreement was on 7 August 2025, and it was taken out on 9 May 2025. H hasn’t disputed there were any fees applied in the first 30-day period either, so I’m satisfied it benefited from the no commitment trial it says was offered here. I recognise Mr K says he felt pressured into taking out the agreement, and I have no reason to doubt what he’s said. However, the messages Mr K has provided from Paymentsense are dated after the agreement was already signed and appear to be requesting a time for the terminals to be set up for H – I’m not persuaded this contact had any impact on H as the 30- day cancellation period had already started. Instead, it would appear Paymentsense’s agent was keen to check everything was working within the 30 days in case of an issue. So based on the evidence available, I can’t fairly say Paymentsense behaved unreasonably here. Mr K says it’s unfair for Paymentsense to charge the early termination and related cancellation fees as Paymentsense hasn’t incurred the level of costs its charging, but I don’t

-- 2 of 3 --

agree. I say that because Paymentsense still provided services to H in the form of arranging the contracts, providing the card terminals, and setting up H’s accounts. Therefore, I’m satisfied some costs would have been incurred by Paymentsense to administer H’s account. Furthermore, the terms of H’s agreement with Paymentsense are clear that if the agreement has a minimum term and it is cancelled before the end of the term, that H would need to pay “the remaining card machine services for the duration of the minimum term”. I don’t think Paymentsense has treated H unfairly by charging the company the cancellation fee it accepted when Mr K signed the agreement. Mr K told our service Paymentsense’s administration has been poor, in particular it referenced information being provided for an unrelated company and no response to its request for cancellation. I agree Paymentsense has made some errors, but it’s not the role of our service to fine or punish a business for making a mistake. And I’m also not persuaded these errors have had a significant impact on H. I’ve looked at the evidence from both parties, and although there was another company’s information provided in the contact with Mr K, this appears to be for a company he has personal connections to. It appears this company is referenced in the text messages between Mr K and Paymentsense’s representative. So, I think that’s likely where the error occurred. Additionally, I recognise Mr K’s frustration that he didn’t get a response to his cancellation request when he emailed Paymentsense initially. However, I can see in the terms and conditions, Paymentsense provided contact information to be used should H have any queries about its account, but Mr K didn’t use these details. I think it’s reasonable to think there may have been a delay in H receiving a response in view of this. However, as I’ve mentioned above, I’m not persuaded this made a difference here as H was already outside of the 30-day cancellation terms and it had also contacted its bank to arrange for the payments made to Paymentsense from July onwards to be refunded. I’m sorry to disappoint Mr K as I know he feels strongly about H’s complaint. However, I don’t think Paymentsense has behaved unreasonably in requiring it to repay the outstanding balance due as a result of it cancelling its agreement early. My final decision My final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask H to accept or reject my decision before 23 April 2026. Jenny Lomax Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --