Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Marsh FM LLP

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B purchased a ten-year-old used car with 83,000 miles under a hire purchase agreement with Marsh FM LLP in December 2023 for approximately £11,250. He subsequently complained that the car was of unsatisfactory quality due to parking sensor faults reported shortly after purchase, and that the warranty was mis-sold because he was unaware of exclusions. Marsh acknowledged service and communication failings but declined to refund the warranty or cancel the agreement. The ombudsman found no evidence to support the unsatisfactory quality claim, as Mr B provided no independent diagnostic or repair evidence, and found no misrepresentation as the warranty terms and exclusions were provided before purchase. The complaint was not upheld.

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 a car to be of unsatisfactory quality, evidence must demonstrate a fault existed at the point of supply. Mr B reported a parking sensor fault shortly after purchase, but provided no independent evidence (diagnostic report, repair invoice, or engineer's report) to confirm the fault existed at supply. Without such evidence, the ombudsman could not conclude the vehicle was of unsatisfactory quality. Regarding misrepresentation, the ombudsman found no false statement of fact about the warranty. The warranty booklet was provided before Mr B signed the agreement, giving him opportunity to review terms, ask questions, and seek clarification. The ombudsman concluded Mr B had sufficient information to make an informed decision.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website