Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Specialist Motor Finance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr D purchased a nine-year-old used car via hire-purchase from Specialist Motor Finance in July 2023. Shortly after delivery, he noticed smoke and engine warning lights but declined the dealership's offer to return the car. Over two years later, after an independent garage's repair work in June 2025 failed to resolve issues, Mr D sought to hold Specialist Motor Finance liable for both the repair quality and the car's original condition. The ombudsman rejected the complaint, finding that Mr D's acceptance of the car in 2023, the passage of time, additional mileage covered, and his own statements indicating the problems arose from the repair work rather than the car's original condition meant he could not demonstrate a lack of satisfactory quality at supply. Specialist Motor Finance bears no responsibility for the independent garage's work.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015 satisfactory quality test, which is objective and considers what a reasonable person would find satisfactory given the car's age, mileage, price, and condition. The ombudsman found that Mr D's decision not to reject the car in 2023 when offered the opportunity constituted acceptance of the car and its condition. The passage of over two years, additional mileage of 17,758 miles, and component replacements made it impossible to obtain persuasive evidence of the car's condition at supply. Critically, Mr D's own complaint statement indicated that the current problems (knocking, rattling, smoke) only started after the independent garage's repair work, not that they were pre-existing defects from supply. The ombudsman concluded that Specialist Motor Finance bears no responsibility for the independent garage's work or costs.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website