Upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods / irresponsible failure to repair complaint against Santander Consumer (UK) Plc
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6266549 of 2026-05-12T00:00:00+00:00. unsatisfactory quality of goods / irresponsible failure to repair complaint against Santander Consumer (UK) Plc. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6266549 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-12T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Santander Consumer (UK) Plc |
| Product | conditional sale agreement (car finance) |
| Claim type | unsatisfactory quality of goods / irresponsible failure to repair |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Santander Consumer (UK) Plc must: (1) End the conditional sale agreement with nothing further to pay in monthly payments; (2) Collect the vehicle at no cost to Mr C; (3) Refund Mr C's advance payment of £359.00 (less any dealer contributions); (4) Pay 8% simple yearly interest on the refund from date of payment to date of refund; (5) Pay £300.00 for distress and inconvenience caused (taking into account any amount already paid); (6) Remove any incorrect adverse information from Mr C's credit file. |
Summary
Mr C purchased a brand-new car under a conditional sale agreement with Santander Consumer (UK) Plc in October 2024 for £29,850.00. Within days of ownership, he reported vibration issues and Bluetooth problems to the dealership. Although the dealership investigated twice without finding a fault, an independent inspection report in July 2025 confirmed a vibration fault, supported by the vehicle manufacturer's bulletin. Santander initially upheld the complaint and stated the repair part would be ordered, but it was never fitted despite Mr C's repeated follow-up attempts. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding the car was not of satisfactory quality at supply and the repair was not completed in a reasonable timeframe, entitling Mr C to reject the vehicle. Santander was ordered to end the agreement, collect the vehicle, refund the advance payment with interest, and pay £300.00 for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which implies goods must be of satisfactory quality. For a brand-new car, a reasonable person would expect higher quality standards and freedom from defects for a considerable period. The independent inspection report, manufacturer's first bulletin, and evidence that not all models have the vibration issue all confirm a genuine fault existed at point of sale. Although the dealership investigated twice without diagnosing the issue, the independent report and manufacturer guidance support that a fault was present or developing. Critically, despite being told the repair part was ordered, there is no evidence the dealership ever fitted it, and Mr C's correspondence shows he was attempting to follow up on the repair rather than rejecting it. The failure to complete the repair in a reasonable timeframe means Mr C has the right to reject the vehicle under the CRA.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Santander Consumer (UK) Plc, all decisions | 911 | 47% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website