Not upheld: Other regulated complaint complaint against Mitsubishi HC Capital UK PLC trading as Novuna Vehicle Solutions (NVS)

Decision detail

Summary

Miss C complained about a hire agreement with NVS, arguing that she was not provided with an executed copy of the agreement in a durable medium until 6 November 2025, which should have extended her cancellation period under the Consumer Contract Regulations 2013. She also complained that she expected a 2026 model year vehicle but received a 2025 model, and that NVS provided misleading information about vehicle usage. The ombudsman found that documents were available for download and printing immediately after electronic signing, that Miss C's cancellation attempt fell outside the 14-day period, and that no misrepresentation occurred regarding the vehicle model year. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that NVS provided documents in a compliant manner by making them available for download and printing immediately after electronic signing, even though Miss C chose not to access them expecting email delivery instead. The cancellation period under the CCR was 14 days from contract entry for a service contract (hire agreement), and Miss C's attempt to cancel fell outside this period. Regarding the vehicle model year, the ombudsman found no misrepresentation as Miss C was given relevant information about the vehicle's specification and features, and had the opportunity to ask questions before signing. The ombudsman noted that if Miss C had a specific requirement about model year, she should have confirmed this before signing. Communications about vehicle usage, whilst potentially unclear, were attributed to different guidance from the broker versus NVS and caused no detriment.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website