Not upheld: complaint handling and service quality; potential breach of Consumer Duty complaint against MotoNovo Finance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

X complained to MotoNovo about a used car purchased under a hire purchase agreement, reporting mechanical faults (humming and whining noises) shortly after supply on 1 September 2025. While MotoNovo initially required X to evidence the fault and offered only £80 towards diagnostics, the supplying dealer ultimately agreed to repair the vehicle at no cost. X remained dissatisfied with MotoNovo's complaint handling, citing poor communication, lack of phone contact, delayed case handler assignment, and inconvenience from multiple journeys. MotoNovo offered £200 compensation, which X rejected and escalated to the FOS. The ombudsman found that although MotoNovo's service fell short of expectations, the firm resolved the matter within eight weeks and the £200 compensation fairly reflected the distress caused, with no breach of Consumer Duty warranting further action.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While MotoNovo's initial approach of requiring evidence and limiting diagnostic contribution was not particularly helpful, the supplying dealer ultimately repaired the vehicle at no cost to X, resolving the quality issue. Although MotoNovo's service fell short in not allocating a case handler earlier and not using X's preferred contact method, they did engage with X, provided updates, issued holding responses, and resolved the matter within the eight-week regulatory timeframe. The ombudsman found no breach of Consumer Duty warranting additional compensation beyond the £200 already offered, which fairly reflected the distress and inconvenience caused.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website