Veste

Partially upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods and alleged mis-selling complaint against BMW Financial Services (GB) Limited trading as Alphera Financial Services

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6333438 of 2026-05-07T00:00:00+00:00. unsatisfactory quality of goods and alleged mis-selling complaint against BMW Financial Services (GB) Limited trading as Alphera Financial Services. Outcome: Partially upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6333438
Decision date2026-05-07T00:00:00+00:00
FirmBMW Financial Services (GB) Limited trading as Alphera Financial Services
Producthire purchase agreement
Claim typeunsatisfactory quality of goods and alleged mis-selling
OutcomePartially upheld
RemedyAlphera to: (1) collect car at no cost once Mr P arranges cosmetic paintwork repairs to appropriate standard and agreement ended; (2) reimburse all instalments from January 2025 to date with 8% simple interest per annum from date of payment; (3) pay £250 compensation for dealing with faulty car (if not already paid); (4) remove any adverse credit file information relating to the agreement.

Summary

Mr P purchased a used car via hire purchase with Alphera Financial Services in April 2024 and discovered faults including an oil leak and turbo noise shortly after acquisition. Although the dealer attempted repairs, the faults persisted and were confirmed by both a manufacturer-approved garage and an independent engineer. Mr P also complained the car was mis-sold as it lacked advertised features and had higher mileage than stated. The ombudsman upheld the unsatisfactory quality complaint, finding the car was not of satisfactory quality at point of supply and Mr P had the right to reject it under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. However, the mis-selling complaint was rejected as the advert contained a disclaimer and the missing features would have been noticeable during inspection. The ombudsman required Mr P to arrange cosmetic paintwork repairs (which had been damaged while in his possession) before returning the car, with Alphera to reimburse payments from January 2025 onwards and pay £250 compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found the car was not of satisfactory quality at point of supply based on confirmed faults (oil leak and turbo noise) and that repairs had either not been carried out or had failed. The misrepresentation claim failed because the advert contained a clear disclaimer advising customers to check specifications with the dealer, and the missing features would have been noticeable during pre-purchase inspection. The ombudsman determined that while Mr P had the right to reject the car under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, he remained responsible for cosmetic damage to the paintwork sustained while in his possession, as there was no evidence the dealer caused it. The fairest resolution was to end the agreement with Mr P arranging paintwork repairs before return, with reimbursement of payments from January 2025 onwards and £250 compensation.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
BMW Financial Services (GB) Limited trading as Alphera Financial Services, all decisions3137%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website