Upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Carmoola Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6057457 of 2026-01-30T00:00:00+00:00. Goods and services under S75 complaint against Carmoola Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6057457 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-01-30T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Carmoola Limited |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | Goods and services under S75 |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | End the finance agreement with nothing further payable; refund deposit; ensure no payments due beyond May 2025; reimburse evidenced diagnostic costs; reimburse difference between evidenced hire car costs and monthly repayment (£472.50 documented); pay 8% simple yearly interest on all refunded amounts from date of payment until settlement; pay £150 for distress and inconvenience; remove adverse credit file information relating to the agreement. |
Summary
Mr J purchased a used car aged 5.5 years with 25,542 miles under a hire purchase agreement with Carmoola Limited in November 2024. The vehicle developed engine problems requiring coolant top-ups, was mis-fuelled in January 2025, and failed to start in May 2025 with diagnostics suggesting piston ring damage. An independent inspection identified engine faults but could not determine the cause and recommended specialist investigation, which Carmoola Limited did not pursue. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding the vehicle was not of satisfactory quality at supply, and ordered Carmoola Limited to reject the vehicle, refund the deposit, reimburse payments and costs, and pay £150 compensation plus interest.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, goods supplied must be of satisfactory quality. For a used car of 5.5 years old with 25,542 miles, while some wear and tear is expected, the timing of the engine failure and the independent inspector's findings suggest the vehicle was not of satisfactory quality at supply. The onus was on Carmoola Limited to prove satisfactory quality, and they failed to do so. The fact that the vehicle operated for several months after the January mis-fuelling incident suggests the mis-fuel was not the cause of the May failure. The inspector's recommendation for further specialist investigation was not pursued by Carmoola Limited, leaving no evidence to prove the vehicle was satisfactory at point of sale.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Carmoola Limited, all decisions | 17 | 41% |
| Goods and services under S75, all decisions | 19,153 | 37% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 19,455 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website