Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Stellantis Financial Services UK Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss M purchased a used car over seven years old with 46,000 miles in June 2024 under a conditional sale agreement with Stellantis Financial Services. She complained that the car was misrepresented as having a full-service history and was not of satisfactory quality when it suffered engine failure in June 2025 (12 months later at 54,000 miles), requiring engine replacement. The ombudsman found no misrepresentation as the sales advert did not promise a full-service history and the dealership denied making such a statement. The ombudsman also found the car was of satisfactory quality at supply, as the engine failure resulted from wear and tear and four years of missed manufacturer servicing rather than a pre-existing defect, and no independent technical evidence proved the damage was present at supply. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which implies a term that goods supplied under a conditional sale agreement must be of satisfactory quality at the point of supply. For misrepresentation, both a false statement of fact and reliance must be established. The only contemporaneous evidence (the sales advert) did not promise a full-service history, and the dealership denied making such a statement. Regarding satisfactory quality, the car was over seven years old with 46,000 miles, and a reasonable person would expect lower standards than for a newer vehicle. The engine failure occurred 12 months after supply, placing the burden on Miss M to prove the faults were present or developing at supply. No independent technical evidence confirmed the damage was pre-existing. Critically, the car had missed four years of servicing and maintenance, which is essential for engine durability. The ombudsman concluded the engine failure resulted from wear and tear and poor maintenance rather than a pre-existing defect.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website