Not upheld: mis-selling of hire purchase agreement complaint against FCE Bank Plc trading as Ford Credit

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs C complained that her hire purchase agreement with Ford Credit was mis-sold, claiming she was pressured into the agreement, not presented with the option to sell the car privately, and was in a vulnerable financial position. She stated the agreement had higher monthly payments than alternatives and resulted in negative equity as the car depreciated. Ford Credit argued that adequate explanation was provided and Mrs C had signed to confirm she understood the terms. The ombudsman found the agreement terms were clearly set out in pre-contractual information, Mrs C had demonstrated awareness of alternative options through prior discussions and valuations, and no compelling evidence of misrepresentation was provided. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the terms of the hire purchase agreement were clearly set out in the pre-contractual information and the agreement itself. Mrs C had signed to acknowledge she received an adequate explanation of the key features including repayment amounts and mileage allowance. The ombudsman noted that Mrs C was aware of alternative options as evidenced by her discussions with the retailer in November 2022 and her obtaining a private valuation in March 2023. The ombudsman rejected the argument that the agreement was mis-sold based on subsequent car depreciation, finding it unreasonable to expect Ford Credit to predict future depreciation. The optional final payment gave Mrs C the flexibility to hand back the car without making that payment. No specific detailed testimony was provided by Mrs C about what she was told, and no compelling evidence of misrepresentation was found.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website