Not upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods (car finance) complaint against MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C purchased a used ten-year-old car with 97,435 miles for £4,410 financed by Moneybarn in June 2024. Approximately 13 months later, after covering an additional 16,000 miles, the car's engine failed and required replacement at a cost of £3,199.80. Mr C complained that the car was of unsatisfactory quality at supply, arguing the engine damage must have been present at that time. The ombudsman rejected this complaint, finding that while the car did develop an engine fault, there was insufficient evidence that the fault existed or was developing at the point of supply, and that a reasonable person would have considered such a used, high-mileage vehicle durable despite the eventual failure.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015 standard of 'satisfactory quality', considering the car's age (ten years), price (£4,410), mileage (97,435 miles at supply), and the reasonable expectations of a buyer. While the car developed an engine fault approximately 13 months after supply, the ombudsman found insufficient evidence that this fault was present or developing at the point of supply. The garage comment that damage occurred 'over a prolonged period' did not specify when the process began. The significant time elapsed (13 months) and mileage covered (16,000+ miles) before failure, combined with the car's age and mileage at supply, led the ombudsman to conclude the fault was not present or developing at supply. The ombudsman also considered durability and found a reasonable person would have considered the car durable given these circumstances.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website