Upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Arval UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B acquired a new car through a hire agreement with Arval in July 2020. In 2024, at approximately 40,000 miles, the car experienced major engine damage requiring repairs costing over £21,000. The vehicle had been regularly serviced and had no previous issues reported. An EGR cooler and intake manifold had been replaced under manufacturer recall shortly before the engine failure. Arval offered to contribute to repair costs but Miss B believed the fault should be Arval's responsibility. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding the car was not of satisfactory quality when supplied because engine failure at 40,000 miles is premature and unusual, likely caused by defects present at supply. Arval was ordered to wipe the shortfall, refund the deposit with interest, and pay £250 compensation for stress and inconvenience.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act principle that goods must be of satisfactory quality when supplied, including durability. The car was new when supplied and regularly serviced. Engine failure at 40,000 miles is premature and unusual. On the balance of probabilities, the engine likely failed either due to damage already caused by the EGR cooler and intake manifold defect prior to repair, or another defect present at supply. The ombudsman found it unreasonable that Arval did not offer Miss B the opportunity for independent inspection before closing the matter and returning the car, which prevented her from obtaining evidence of the fault's origin.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website