Partially upheld: administration of conditional sale agreement; customer service failure; communication failure complaint against Santander Consumer (UK) plc T/A Santander Consumer Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Mr L complained about SCUK's administration of a conditional sale agreement for a used car that was seized by police for lack of proper insurance. Mr L paid £630 for compound insurance without knowing SCUK intended to collect the car, and was charged approximately £670 in collection fees. SCUK did not notify Mr L of its involvement or collection intentions, and took three months to formally respond to his complaint. The ombudsman found SCUK was contractually entitled to recover the car and charge fees, but had failed in customer communication during a stressful period. The complaint was partially upheld, with SCUK directed to pay £200 compensation and provide an account status update, but not to reimburse the insurance cost.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found SCUK was contractually entitled to recover the car as legal owner following Mr L's breach of the insurance requirement, and collection fees were valid. However, the ombudsman found SCUK's communication was inadequate, particularly the three-month delay between seizure and formal response during a stressful period when Mr L was also receiving collection correspondence. While SCUK was not obligated to notify Mr L before collecting the car given the contractual terms, the poor communication warranted compensation. The £630 compound insurance cost was not recoverable as it was not a direct consequence of SCUK's wrongdoing, but rather resulted from Mr L's lack of awareness of SCUK's intentions.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website