Partially upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Ferrari Financial Services GmbH
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-3184472 of 2022-03-18T00:00:00+00:00. Goods and services under S75 complaint against Ferrari Financial Services GmbH. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-3184472 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2022-03-18T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Ferrari Financial Services GmbH |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | Goods and services under S75 |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | FFS directed to: (1) pay for repair work as recommended in expert report dated 23 May 2021, to be undertaken by appropriate Ferrari specialist unless parties agree otherwise; (2) refund two months' worth of payments to Mr B. |
Summary
Mr B purchased a second-hand Ferrari for £348,850 via hire purchase in November 2018 and later discovered multiple paintwork defects including a marked panel, dry lines, lacquer flaking, and water ingress to headlights. After warranty repairs proved unsatisfactory, Mr B sought to reject the car. The ombudsman partially upheld the complaint, finding the car was fit for purpose at point of sale despite defects, as expert evidence indicated issues were minor and addressable through detailing/polishing rather than warranting rejection. FFS was directed to fund recommended repair work and refund two months' payments, but rejection was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied consumer law regarding implied terms of satisfactory quality, considering the car's age, mileage, history as demonstrator/track-day vehicle, and that it was hand-painted specialist vehicle with inherent variations. While accepting the mark was more likely than not present at point of sale, the ombudsman found the expert evidence did not establish the car was unfit for purpose. The paintwork defects identified by RAC inspectors were deemed minor and addressable through detailing/polishing. The ombudsman rejected the corrosion argument as unsupported by the body shop manager's findings. The delay in identifying defects (13 months) and Mr B's choice not to accept the car back during dispute undermined the rejection claim. The ombudsman distinguished between fitness for purpose and concours condition, finding the car met the former standard for a pre-owned specialist vehicle.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Ferrari Financial Services GmbH, all decisions | 4 | 38% |
| Goods and services under S75, all decisions | 19,153 | 37% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 19,456 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website