Not upheld: misrepresentation / unsuitable product (EV charger) complaint against Volvo Car Financial Services UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs W purchased a Volvo car under a conditional sale agreement in June 2025 and opted into a promotional offer for a free EV charger. She informed the dealership she needed a Wi-Fi-enabled charger due to poor mobile phone coverage, but the charger company supplied an unsuitable charger requiring mobile phone signal. After a replacement also failed to resolve the issue, Mrs W paid £1,668 for a suitable charger and complained to Volvo. The ombudsman found that the charger was not part of the regulated finance agreement and was subject to a separate contract with the charger company, and there was insufficient evidence of misrepresentation regarding the charger offer. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the supply and installation of the charger did not form part of the regulated car finance agreement, as evidenced by the absence of any reference to the charger in the conditional sale agreement and the explicit terms and conditions stating that Volvo was not responsible for the charger. The ombudsman also found insufficient evidence of misrepresentation, as there were conflicting accounts of what was discussed regarding the charger offer, and the online promotional information only referenced two charger types both using smartphone apps, with no indication that a Wi-Fi-enabled charger would be available. Therefore, Volvo's direction of Mrs W to the charger company was reasonable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website