Not upheld: goods not of satisfactory quality under Consumer Rights Act 2015 complaint against MotoNovo Finance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H purchased a nine-year-old car with 69,000 miles under a hire purchase agreement with MotoNovo in May 2025 for £17,000. In October 2025, within six months of purchase, he complained that all dashboard warning lights had illuminated, rendering the car undriveable. MotoNovo commissioned an independent inspection which concluded that the faults (consistent with a failed body control module) would not have been developing at point of sale and were due to wear and deterioration expected on a vehicle of that age and mileage. The ombudsman upheld MotoNovo's position, finding the independent inspection to be robust evidence that the car met the satisfactory quality standard required by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which implies that goods must conform to contract within the first six months, placing the burden on MotoNovo to prove faults were not present or developing at point of supply. The independent inspection by a qualified motor technician was found to be the most persuasive evidence. The engineer concluded that faults of this nature (wear and deterioration) would not be unexpected on a vehicle of this age and mileage, and would not have been developing at point of sale. The ombudsman clarified that fault codes are warning indicators, not confirmation of mechanical defects, and can be triggered by temporary conditions. The fact that the car travelled over 5,000 miles without presenting an inherent fault suggested any underlying defect would have manifested sooner.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website