Not upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods (vehicle) complaint against CA AUTO FINANCE UK LTD

Decision detail

Summary

Ms B purchased a used car via a PCP agreement with CA Auto Finance in November 2021 for £25,995. The car experienced four engine failures between February 2023 and May 2025, requiring multiple engine replacements. The first failure occurred at 17,633 miles due to the car not being serviced within manufacturer intervals, and Ms B paid £14,400 for the repair. Subsequent failures were caused by improper fitting of replacement engines, including loose bolts and timing issues. The ombudsman found that while the car lacked durability, this resulted from maintenance and repair issues rather than defects present when supplied, 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 considering their age, price, mileage, and durability expectations. While acknowledging the car's significant problems, the ombudsman concluded the first engine failure resulted from the car not being serviced within manufacturer intervals (driven significantly beyond 10,000 miles without service), which is detrimental to engines. Crucially, subsequent engine failures were caused by improper repair work during the first engine replacement (loose bolts, timing issues) rather than defects present when the car was supplied. Therefore, the lack of durability stemmed from maintenance and repair issues, not the quality of the car at supply.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website