Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against STARTLINE MOTOR FINANCE LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Miss T complained that a used car supplied through a hire purchase agreement with SMF in June 2024 suffered a timing chain failure in October 2025, rendering it undriveable. She sought repair costs or alternative resolution. SMF declined to investigate, citing the six-month delay, but later arranged an independent inspection which found insufficient evidence that the issue was present at supply. The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and found that while a timing chain failure occurred, the available evidence indicated in-service wear and tear rather than an inherent defect. Given the car's age (five years), mileage (55,193 miles at supply), and the 15-month ownership period before failure, the ombudsman concluded the car was of satisfactory quality at supply and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which requires goods to be of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, and as described. For a used car, a reasonable person would expect lower quality than a new car and some wear and tear. The ombudsman found that while a timing chain failure occurred, the available evidence pointed to in-service wear and tear rather than an inherent defect present at supply. Given the 15-month gap between supply and failure, the ombudsman considered it reasonable to place the onus on Miss T to provide evidence of an inherent fault, which she had not done. The independent inspection's conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to show the component was not reasonably durable did not support a finding of unsatisfactory quality at point of supply.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website