Not upheld: mis-selling - alleged misrepresentation of finance agreement terms, undisclosed fees, and fraudulent signature complaint against Motion Finance 2017 Limited (trading as Motion Finance)

Decision detail

Summary

Miss H complained that Motion Finance mis-sold her a car finance agreement by failing to disclose optional extras, not explaining the balloon payment, and fraudulently using her signature. The ombudsman reviewed a telephone call recording showing the broker clearly explained the £18,152 balloon payment and three options available, with Miss H confirming affordability. A signed vehicle order form listed the optional extras. The ombudsman found no evidence of misrepresentation and determined the signature forgery allegation was outside its jurisdiction, requiring forensic expertise and potentially constituting a criminal matter. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the test for misrepresentation, requiring both a false statement of fact and that such statement induced entry into the agreement. Based on the telephone call recording, the ombudsman found that the balloon payment was clearly explained with three options presented to Miss H, who confirmed affordability. The vehicle order form clearly listed additional items and was signed. No false statements of fact were found. The signature forgery allegation was outside the ombudsman's jurisdiction as it requires forensic expertise and could constitute a criminal matter.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website