Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Secure Trust Bank Public Limited Company trading as Moneyway

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B purchased a nine-year-old used vehicle with 85,600 miles through a hire purchase agreement with Moneyway for £11,686. After approximately six months and 7,300 miles of use, the vehicle experienced a catastrophic engine failure involving turbo failure and oil pressure issues. Mr B claimed the vehicle was of unsatisfactory quality at supply and relied on the six-month CRA presumption. However, an independent expert inspection found no technical evidence that the fault was present or developing at point of sale, concluding instead that the failure was consistent with post-sale wear and tear. The ombudsman found the expert evidence sufficient to rebut the statutory presumption and upheld Moneyway's position that the vehicle was of satisfactory quality when supplied, rejecting the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015 standard of satisfactory quality, considering the vehicle's age (nine years old), mileage (85,600 miles at supply), and price (£11,686). The independent expert report provided sufficient technical evidence to rebut the six-month presumption by positively identifying that the fault was not present or developing at point of sale, but rather developed through post-sale wear and tear. The expert's reasoned opinion on the balance of probabilities, despite being non-destructive and not definitively establishing the precise cause, was capable of rebutting the statutory presumption. The ombudsman rejected arguments about servicing record discrepancies and recall notices as not materially affecting the expert's core findings.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website