Veste

Not upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods and misrepresentation complaint against Black Horse Limited trading as Jaguar Financial Services

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6074074 of 2026-05-06T00:00:00+00:00. unsatisfactory quality of goods and misrepresentation complaint against Black Horse Limited trading as Jaguar Financial Services. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6074074
Decision date2026-05-06T00:00:00+00:00
FirmBlack Horse Limited trading as Jaguar Financial Services
ProductMotor finance (PCP / HP)
Claim typeunsatisfactory quality of goods and misrepresentation
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyBlack Horse Limited trading as Jaguar Financial Services should pay: (1) £250 for distress and inconvenience caused; (2) £84.30 for loss of use for periods the garage had the car for repair and Mrs S was not provided with a courtesy car, with 8% simple yearly interest added from time of payment to time of reimbursement.

Summary

Mrs S complained that a used car acquired via Personal Contract Purchase from Black Horse Limited (Jaguar Financial Services) in September 2024 was not of satisfactory quality and had been misrepresented as meeting manufacturer-approved used car standards. The car, approximately four years old with 14,129 miles, developed multiple faults including DPF, EGR cooler, starter motor, and battery issues, along with connectivity problems and incomplete service history. While the ombudsman found the car was not of satisfactory quality in relation to the component faults, BHL's repair of these faults at no cost to Mrs S was deemed fair and reasonable under consumer rights law. The ombudsman found no evidence of misrepresentation regarding the approved used standards, service history, non-genuine parts, or connectivity features. The complaint was not upheld, and the ombudsman upheld BHL's offer of £250 compensation plus £84.30 for loss of use.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the car had faults with the DPF, EGR cooler, starter motor, and battery, these were repaired at no cost to Mrs S in accordance with Consumer Rights Act 2015 provisions. The ombudsman determined that for a four-year-old used car with 14,129 miles costing £21,525, a reasonable person would not expect it to be in pristine condition but would expect trouble-free motoring for a short time. The faults identified fell within satisfactory quality concerns, but BHL's repair remedy was appropriate. Regarding misrepresentation, the ombudsman found no evidence of false statements of fact: the 165-point inspection was documented as carried out; no claim of full service history was evidenced; non-genuine parts were not described as genuine; and connectivity issues appeared to be account setup or configuration problems rather than car defects. The ombudsman concluded that Mrs S's agreement to the repairs and continued use of the car meant rejection was not appropriate.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Black Horse Limited trading as Jaguar Financial Services, all decisions250%
Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions18,52138%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website