Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Motability Operations Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr L complained that a car supplied under a hire agreement with Motability Operations Limited was of unsatisfactory quality after he experienced a sudden braking fault in July 2025. The dealership was unable to identify or replicate the fault during a three-month investigation period. MO agreed to cancel the agreement and provide a replacement car, and offered £250 compensation plus £80 reimbursement. Mr L, a vulnerable customer with multiple health conditions, argued the hire car provided was unsuitable and that MO failed to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010. The ombudsman found no mechanical evidence of a fault, concluded that MO reasonably mitigated the impact by offering cancellation without a diagnosed fault, and determined that the hire car, though not ideal, provided continued mobility. The ombudsman upheld MO's offer of £250 as fair and proportionate compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found no mechanical evidence of a fault with the car, and the dealership's inability to identify or replicate the fault suggested no underlying problem existed. While MO could have pursued the dealership more actively during a six-week period of inactivity, it reasonably mitigated the impact by agreeing to cancel the agreement and provide a replacement car without requiring proof of a fault. Although the hire car was not ideal and lacked some accessibility features, it provided continued mobility. The ombudsman considered Mr L's vulnerable circumstances and health conditions as relevant factors in assessing compensation, but concluded that MO's offer of £250 was proportionate to the impact of its errors, particularly given that MO had already gone beyond its obligations by offering mechanical cancellation without a diagnosed fault.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website