Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Ferrari Financial Services GmbH

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C purchased a car via hire-purchase agreement with Ferrari Financial Services in September 2022 and experienced persistent brake noise despite multiple repair attempts by the dealership. Dissatisfied with the car, Mr C sold it to the dealership at a loss in June 2023 and sought reimbursement from Ferrari Financial Services. The ombudsman rejected the complaint, finding insufficient evidence of breach of satisfactory quality obligations under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. The ombudsman noted that Ferrari Financial Services was unaware of issues until late in the process, bore no responsibility for the dealership's actions, and could not be fairly held liable for losses from Mr C's resale decision.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Ferrari Financial Services bore no responsibility for D's actions except under section 56 CCA for pre-contractual representations. The key issue was whether the car failed to meet the satisfactory quality test under CRA. While pitted brake pads were replaced and other work undertaken, this does not necessarily indicate defect or safety issue. The underlying cause of brake noise could not be ascertained with certainty, and it was impossible to determine whether this represented a breach of satisfactory quality. Ferrari Financial Services could potentially defend any claim by relying on CRA provisions permitting repair attempts before rejection rights. Mr C's resale to D prevented Ferrari Financial Services from attempting its own repair. The ombudsman was sympathetic to the loss but could not fairly require reimbursement.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website