Not upheld: satisfactory quality of goods / defective motor vehicle complaint against STARTLINE MOTOR FINANCE LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Miss L purchased a used car via finance from Startline in June 2024. The car required brake repairs within a week of supply. In July 2025, over one year later, the car failed its MOT due to headlight issues, which the garage suggested might be linked to a previous bumper repair. Miss L complained to Startline, which requested independent evidence that the fault existed at supply. When Miss L did not provide this evidence, Startline rejected the complaint. The ombudsman upheld Startline's position, finding that Miss L had not met the legal burden of proving the fault was present at the point of supply, particularly given the 12-month delay and 7,000 miles driven before the issue manifested.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act principle that where a fault manifests more than six months after supply, the consumer must prove the fault was present or developing at the point of supply. Although the ombudsman acknowledged that faults from poor repairs can take time to manifest, the evidence provided was insufficient. The garage note was inconclusive, merely suggesting a possible link. The fact that the headlight issue did not appear until over one year after supply and after 7,000 miles of driving suggested that if the fault had been present at supply, it would have manifested sooner. Miss L failed to provide the promised photographic evidence or detailed garage report to support her claim.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website