Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Black Horse Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W purchased a used vehicle under a personal contract purchase agreement with Black Horse Limited in October 2025 and complained of unsatisfactory quality and misrepresentation. He reported grinding brakes, fumes causing adverse reactions in his wife (who has a medical condition affecting her sensitivity to chemical environments), and a 269-mile mileage discrepancy on the agreement. The ombudsman found no evidence of vehicle defects, as the dealership inspection recorded no faults and the brakes issue was not substantiated. Regarding the fumes, the ombudsman determined that Mrs W's reactions were unpredictable and variable according to medical evidence, and therefore not attributable to a vehicle defect. The ombudsman reasoned that the dealership could only reasonably offer the vehicle for inspection, which Mr W had the opportunity to conduct. The mileage discrepancy was found to be minor and administrative, and BHL's remedy of £150 compensation and mileage adjustment was deemed fair. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which requires goods to be of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, and as described. For a used car of nearly 3 years old with 26,482 miles, greater wear and tear is reasonably expected. The dealership inspection found no recorded faults with the brakes. Regarding the fumes issue, the ombudsman found no evidence of a vehicle defect; rather, Mrs W's medical condition causes unpredictable and variable reactions to environments that cannot be predicted in advance. The ombudsman reasoned that the dealership could only reasonably offer the vehicle for inspection, which Mr W had the opportunity to do. The mileage discrepancy, while an error, was minor and administrative in nature, and BHL's remedy was fair. The misrepresentation claim failed because the minor mileage error would not have induced different action given the unpredictable nature of Mrs W's condition.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website