Not upheld: quality of goods and mis-selling complaint against Lendable Ltd trading as Autolend

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W purchased a used seven-year-old car with 49,991 miles via hire purchase with Autolend in July 2024 for £10,528. He complained that the car was mis-sold because it had a modified aftermarket exhaust he was not informed about, and the car subsequently failed an MOT in July 2025 due to exhaust issues. The ombudsman found the car was of satisfactory quality at the time of sale because it passed an MOT shortly after purchase and the fault only developed after 12 months of use and significant additional mileage, indicating ordinary wear and tear. The ombudsman also found no misrepresentation as the car advertisement clearly disclosed the aftermarket exhaust, and therefore did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015 standard of 'satisfactory quality' for goods. For a seven-year-old car with 50,000 miles, a reasonable person would expect some wear and tear but also reasonable durability. Since the car passed an MOT shortly after purchase and only failed 12 months later after significant additional mileage, the fault was not present at the time of sale but resulted from ordinary wear and tear. Regarding the alleged misrepresentation, the car advertisement clearly disclosed the aftermarket exhaust, and while Mr W may not have been fully aware of this, the information was provided and he was not misled.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website