Upheld: supply of goods not of satisfactory quality; breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015 complaint against Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6246519 of 2026-04-23T00:00:00+00:00. supply of goods not of satisfactory quality; breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015 complaint against Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6246519 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-23T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) Limited |
| Product | hire purchase agreement (motor finance) |
| Claim type | supply of goods not of satisfactory quality; breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015 |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Collect car without charging collection costs; end agreement and remove from credit file; refund deposit (less any dealer contribution); refund 10% of monthly repayments from inception to settlement; reimburse £78 diagnostic charge; pay £350 compensation for distress and inconvenience; remove adverse credit information; pay 8% yearly simple interest on all refunds from date of payment to settlement |
Summary
Mr C purchased a used car through a hire purchase agreement with VWFS in October 2023 for £34,999. The car had multiple faults from the outset including cracked windows, non-working radio, and malfunctioning lane assist that caused emergency braking. Despite repair attempts, the issues persisted, and VWFS refused to allow rejection of the car, offering only £200 compensation. The ombudsman upheld Mr C's complaint, finding the car was not of satisfactory quality when supplied and instructing VWFS to reject the car, end the agreement, refund the deposit, refund 10% of monthly repayments for loss of use, reimburse the £78 diagnostic charge, and pay £350 compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which implies that goods must be of satisfactory quality. While a reasonable person would expect lower quality standards for a used car with 49,000 miles, the £35,000 price point and relatively recent age meant a reasonable person would expect reasonable duration without serious issues. Since the car was not of satisfactory quality when supplied and repairs failed to resolve the issues, Section 19 of the CRA entitles Mr C to reject the goods. The 10% refund for loss of use was considered fair given Mr C was still able to use the car and travelled 26,000 miles during ownership.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) Limited, all decisions | 1,773 | 31% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website