Not upheld: goods not of satisfactory quality under Consumer Rights Act 2015 complaint against SECURE TRUST BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY trading as Moneyway

Decision detail

Summary

Miss L purchased a used 8-year-old car with 61,772 miles via hire purchase with Moneyway in April 2024. She reported issues to the supplying dealer within weeks but was dismissed, and no formal diagnostics were undertaken until July 2025, over 15 months later. Between supply and May 2025, the car passed an MOT after covering 21,000 miles. From July 2025 onwards, significant faults were identified including turbo and engine issues, culminating in a November 2025 inspection that found a broken solenoid valve and concluded the failure was consistent with a long-standing defect. Miss L sought cancellation of the hire purchase agreement and reimbursement of costs. The ombudsman did not uphold the complaint, finding insufficient evidence that the faults were present or developing at supply, given the car's age, mileage, the time elapsed before formal diagnostics, and the successful MOT in May 2025.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which implies that goods supplied under a hire purchase agreement must be of satisfactory quality at the point of supply. For used cars, satisfactory quality is assessed considering age, mileage, and price. The ombudsman found that while significant faults were identified from July 2025 onwards, there was no evidence these faults were present or developing at supply in April 2024. The fact that Miss L drove the car over 21,000 miles before the May 2025 MOT (which the car passed) suggested the car was fit for purpose at acquisition. The first formal diagnostic evidence came 15 months after supply, by which time the car was over 9 years old with over 83,000 miles. Although the November 2025 report suggested a long-standing defect, without evidence linking the early reported issues to the later identified faults, the ombudsman could not conclude the defects were present from supply.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website