Upheld: supply of goods not of satisfactory quality; irresponsible lending/consumer credit complaint against BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES (GB) LIMITED
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6129689 of 2026-05-29T00:00:00+00:00. supply of goods not of satisfactory quality; irresponsible lending/consumer credit complaint against BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES (GB) LIMITED. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6129689 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-29T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES (GB) LIMITED |
| Product | hire purchase agreement |
| Claim type | supply of goods not of satisfactory quality; irresponsible lending/consumer credit |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | BMWFS must: (1) End the agreement with nothing further for Mr K to pay; (2) Collect the car at no cost to Mr K; (3) Refund the deposit in full (£3,380); (4) Refund monthly payments from 24 August 2025 onwards (£1,055.87); (5) Refund maintenance costs of £420, £46.46, and £127.31; (6) Pay 8% simple yearly interest on all refunds from date of payment to settlement; (7) Pay £225 total for distress and inconvenience (£125 additional if £100 already paid); (8) Provide written explanations detailing all payments, interest amounts, and what has already been paid. |
Summary
Mr K purchased a used car via hire purchase with BMWFS in February 2025. In August 2025, he discovered the odometer was not working and stopped using the car. BMWFS upheld his complaint in their final response letter but confusion arose regarding refunds already paid versus amounts still owed. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, confirming the car was not of satisfactory quality and instructing BMWFS to refund the deposit, monthly payments from 24 August 2025 onwards, maintenance costs totalling £593.77, and pay £225 for distress and inconvenience, all with 8% simple interest. BMWFS must provide clear written explanations of all payments and interest calculations.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman agreed that the car was not of satisfactory quality and rejection was the correct remedy. Mr K is entitled to a refund of his deposit and monthly payments from 24 August 2025 onwards (when he stopped using the car), as he had fair use of the car prior to that date. Maintenance costs paid before rejection should be refunded as Mr K received little benefit from them. All refunds should include 8% simple yearly interest from date of payment. The £125 for complaint handling delays should be separate from the compensation for the car quality issue. Confusion arose due to BMWFS's failure to clearly account for payments already made.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES (GB) LIMITED, all decisions | 1,453 | 46% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website