David Harris & Anor v Peninsula Finance PLC

Facts

The claimants, David Harris and Ewelina Dulewicz, borrowed from Peninsula Finance plc under a staged development finance facility secured by charges over two properties, Oakdale and Ford Plantation. They complained that the lender had restricted and withheld continuation drawdowns at stage three, procured additional security over Ford Plantation, and threatened enforcement — the appointment of receivers, the exercise of its power of sale, and the marketing and disposal of the secured property. In December 2025 they applied, as a freestanding pre-action application, for an injunction restraining enforcement. That application came before HHJ Blohm KC on 18 December 2025 and was dismissed the following day, the lender having undertaken not to enforce until the sooner of the resolution of an ongoing Financial Ombudsman complaint or 28 February 2026; a subsequent application to vary the costs order was refused by DJ Wales on 17 February 2026 on the papers. The Ombudsman decided the complaint on 20 May 2026, directing enforcement over Oakdale, release of the charge over Ford Plantation and a reduction of the debt, but the claimants did not accept that decision. On 6 June 2026 they issued a fresh application for an injunction in almost identical terms, supported by a claim form issued on 8 June 2026 seeking declaratory relief, damages, equitable relief and relief under sections 140A–140C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.