Not upheld: goods not of satisfactory quality / durability complaint against N.I.I.B. Group Limited trading as Northridge Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Miss F purchased a used car via hire purchase with Northridge in October 2023 for £23,550. She reported various faults to Northridge in November 2024, over a year after supply, including potential flywheel and timing cover issues requiring approximately £2,550 in repairs. The ombudsman found that Miss F failed to provide evidence demonstrating these faults were present or developing at the point of supply, as required by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 when complaints are made beyond six months. The garage report and other evidence provided (battery replacement, wear and tear items) were insufficient to establish non-conformity at supply, and the ombudsman upheld Northridge's decision not to offer further assistance.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which implies that goods supplied under a hire purchase agreement must be of satisfactory quality at the point of supply. While the CRA presumes non-conformity within six months of supply, Miss F reported faults over a year later, placing the burden on her to prove faults were present or developing at supply. The garage report from November 2024 did not confirm when faults occurred or their cause. The battery replacement, wear and tear items (tyres, brake pads, fuse), and possible previous paintwork repair were all insufficient to demonstrate faults were present at supply. The ombudsman was satisfied that the car met the standard a reasonable person would find acceptable given its age, mileage, and price.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website