Not upheld: unfair termination of agreement and default registration complaint against BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES (GB) LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T complained that BMWFS unfairly terminated his PCP agreement and registered a default after the vehicle was seized due to unpaid road tax. The vehicle had been seized because someone intercepted the V5c document sent to Mr T's previous address and changed the registered keeper details without his knowledge. Although Mr T recovered the vehicle on 18 March 2025 and maintained all payments, BMWFS had issued a default notice (which Mr T did not receive because he had not notified them of his address change) and subsequently terminated the agreement. The ombudsman found that BMWFS acted fairly and in accordance with the agreement terms, as Mr T was contractually obligated to promptly notify BMWFS of his address change, which he failed to do. The ombudsman held that BMWFS could not be held responsible for Mr T not receiving the default notice or calls, and that it was reasonable for BMWFS to expect Mr T to contact them after recovering the vehicle.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that BMWFS followed the correct contractual process and acted fairly. The agreement terms clearly allowed BMWFS to default and terminate if the vehicle was not kept in Mr T's possession or if someone else became the registered keeper. Although Mr T did not intend for this to happen and took steps to remedy it, the ombudsman held that Mr T was responsible for notifying BMWFS of his address change promptly, which he failed to do. The ombudsman also found it reasonable to expect Mr T to contact BMWFS after recovering the vehicle. The ombudsman could not hold BMWFS responsible for Mr T not receiving the default notice or calls, as these were sent to his correct address at the time.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website