Not upheld: unfair end of agreement charges and irresponsible lending complaint against Stellantis Financial Services UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs J complained about charges applied by SFS following her return of a financed used car in February 2025, and alleged the lending was unaffordable. SFS had charged for excess mileage, damage, missing items, and missing service history, though some charges were later removed. Mrs J argued the charges were unfair due to the absence of a delivery inspection report and photographs showing the car's initial condition, and claimed she relied on dealership advice. The ombudsman found that given the car's four-year possession, 40,000 miles of use, and multiple cumulative areas of damage, it was more likely than not the damage occurred during Mrs J's use. The ombudsman also found insufficient evidence to conclude the lending was unaffordable and upheld SFS's fair application of contractual charges.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the balance of probabilities standard given incomplete and contradictory information. The absence of a delivery inspection report did not prevent assessment of whether damage was likely incurred during Mrs J's use. Given the car was in her possession for over four years, covered 40,000 miles, and exhibited multiple cumulative areas of damage, it was more likely than not that the damage occurred during her use rather than being pre-existing. SFS reasonably assessed damage in the context of the car being used at supply. Regarding irresponsible lending, insufficient evidence was provided by Mrs J regarding her financial circumstances at the time of the agreement to conclude the lending was unaffordable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website