Upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods / breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015 complaint against Santander Consumer (UK) Plc trading as Santander Consumer Finance
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6303979 of 2026-04-22T00:00:00+00:00. unsatisfactory quality of goods / breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015 complaint against Santander Consumer (UK) Plc trading as Santander Consumer Finance. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6303979 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-22T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Santander Consumer (UK) Plc trading as Santander Consumer Finance |
| Product | conditional sale agreement (car finance) |
| Claim type | unsatisfactory quality of goods / breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015 |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Santander must: (1) reimburse Mrs O for the cost of brake repairs in October 2024 (£950) upon receipt of proof of payment, if not already refunded by the dealership; (2) apply 8% simple yearly interest on the reimbursement calculated from the date Mrs O made the payment to the date of refund; (3) pay Mrs O £150 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by being supplied with a car that was not of satisfactory quality. |
Summary
Mrs O purchased a used car through a conditional sale agreement with Santander in March 2024. The car was almost three years old with 8,513 miles. In October 2024, Mrs O incurred £950 in brake repairs. Santander rejected her complaint, citing the six-month rule for identifying faults. The ombudsman found that the vehicle health check and MOT records both identified brake issues at the point of supply, caused by long-term non-use of the vehicle rather than normal wear and tear. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding the car was not of satisfactory quality when supplied, and directed Santander to reimburse the brake repair costs plus 8% interest and pay £150 compensation for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that the brake issues were present at the point of supply, not caused by normal wear and tear. The vehicle health check and MOT both identified brake problems at 8,513 miles, and the long-term non-use of the car (evidenced by internal mold) caused corrosion and deterioration of the brakes. Given the car had only travelled 8,500 miles, the brake discs and pads should not have required replacement due to normal wear. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, the car was not of satisfactory quality when supplied, and Santander is responsible as the supplier of goods. The repair was the single chance to remedy the defect, so rejection was not available, but reimbursement of repair costs plus compensation was appropriate.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Santander Consumer (UK) Plc trading as Santander Consumer Finance, all decisions | 7 | 43% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website