Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Tesla Financial Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr I purchased a brand-new car via conditional sale agreement with TFSL in November 2021 for £50,690. Over three years later, in March 2025 after 55,000 miles of use, Mr I complained about repairs needed to the boot lid, seat adjustment button, and super manifold assembly, requesting TFSL cover the costs as a goodwill gesture despite the warranty having expired. TFSL declined, stating issues were first raised in 2025 and there was no known defect with the super manifold. The ombudsman found that while faults existed, they were not present or developing at supply, as they only manifested after three years and significant mileage, and therefore did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which requires goods to be of satisfactory quality at the point of supply. While faults existed in the car, the ombudsman reasoned that had these faults been present or developing at supply, they would have manifested much sooner than three years later and 55,000 miles of use. The ombudsman found no evidence specific to Mr I's car showing premature failure or defects present at supply. The timing and mileage at which issues emerged indicated they developed during use rather than being present at supply.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website