Upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Marsh Finance Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6056543 of 2026-02-11T00:00:00+00:00. Goods and services under S75 complaint against Marsh Finance Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6056543 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-02-11T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Marsh Finance Limited |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | Goods and services under S75 |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Marsh Finance Limited must: (1) end the agreement with nothing further to pay; (2) remove adverse credit file information; (3) collect the car at no cost to Mr C; (4) refund monthly rentals for periods when the car could not be used (28 Feb-3 Mar 2025, 12 Mar-14 May 2025, 24 Aug 2025 to settlement); (5) pay 8% simple yearly interest on refunded amounts from date of payment to settlement; (6) pay £200 compensation for distress and inconvenience. |
Summary
Mr C purchased a used car through a hire purchase agreement with Marsh Finance Limited in February 2025 for £13,695 credit. The car, which had 70,650 miles and was over seven years old, developed engine faults shortly after purchase. Despite repairs by the supplying dealership, the faults persisted and recurred. An independent engineer's inspection confirmed the faults were present at point of sale and that previous repairs had failed due to misdiagnosis. The ombudsman upheld Mr C's complaint, finding the car was not of satisfactory quality, and directed Marsh to allow rejection of the car, cancel the credit agreement, refund certain monthly payments with interest, and pay £200 compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The independent engineer's report is the most compelling evidence, confirming the presence of faults and concluding that the DPF issue was present and developing at point of sale. The engineer identified that previous repair attempts were based on misdiagnosis and misinterpretation of diagnostic codes. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, the supplying dealership is afforded one opportunity to repair all faults. Since the repairs failed and the fault persists, the car was not of satisfactory quality when supplied, and Mr C is entitled to reject it. Marsh, as the supplier under the hire purchase agreement, is responsible for this outcome regardless of the finance broker or dealership's views.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Marsh Finance Limited, all decisions | 42 | 67% |
| Goods and services under S75, all decisions | 19,153 | 37% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 18,521 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website