Not upheld: fairness of vehicle damage charges and service history charges complaint against Mitsubishi HC Capital UK PLC trading as Novuna Vehicle Solutions

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A complained about charges Novuna applied when he returned a financed vehicle in October 2025 after over five years and 70,000 miles. Novuna charged for damage beyond fair wear and tear (paint contamination, scratches, dents, interior trim damage) and incomplete service history. Mr A argued the car's age meant the defects were normal deterioration and questioned the reliability of inspection photographs. The ombudsman found the inspection photographs sufficiently reliable and the identified defects exceeded BVRLA guidance thresholds, rejecting Mr A's alternative explanations. The complaint was not upheld as Novuna acted reasonably in assessing the charges.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the balance of probabilities standard and found the inspection photographs provided sufficiently reliable evidence of damage beyond fair wear and tear. While acknowledging the car's age, the ombudsman noted that age alone does not make all defects fair wear and tear, and Novuna had already applied an age-related reduction. The identified defects (paint contamination, overspray, scratches, dents, interior trim damage) exceeded the thresholds set out in BVRLA guidance. The ombudsman rejected Mr A's alternative explanations (water spotting, cleaning residue, normal ageing) as less likely than Novuna's assessment. The service history charge was also reasonable given the incomplete servicing records.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website