Not upheld: fairness of damage charges on vehicle return complaint against RCI Financial Services Limited trading as Nissan Financial Services (NFS)

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B complained about £117.55 in damage charges levied by NFS after she returned a financed vehicle in August 2025, following NFS's removal of an initial £132 charge. She disputed the remaining charges on grounds including an incorrect date on the inspection report, concerns about inspection procedures, and the fact the vehicle was returned with lower mileage than permitted. The ombudsman reviewed the photographic evidence against BVRLA guidance and found the damage clearly exceeded acceptable wear and tear thresholds, making the charges fair and reasonable. The procedural concerns did not undermine the inspection's reliability or conclusions. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied BVRLA industry guidance to assess whether the charged damage exceeded acceptable wear and tear. The photographic evidence clearly demonstrated damage beyond the specified thresholds (dents over 15mm, scratches over 25mm with primer showing, wheel damage). The incorrect date on the report did not undermine the inspection's reliability given the existence of comprehensive photographs and location consistency. The inspection being conducted independently by a third party does not make it unfair provided the conclusions are reasonable and evidence-supported, which they are. The timing of the report did not materially disadvantage Miss B as she had opportunity to challenge findings through the complaints process. Lower mileage is a separate matter from vehicle condition and does not offset damage charges.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website