Not upheld: unfair charges for vehicle damage complaint against Mercedes-Benz Financial Services UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms B complained about charges of £504.50 levied by MBFS for damage to a car returned at the end of a hire purchase agreement, specifically for a broken headlight and insecure sill moulding. MBFS charged for these items as they considered the damage to be beyond normal wear and tear. The ombudsman examined the inspection photographs and found that the extensive condensation in the headlight indicated underlying damage or a compromised seal, and that the loose or cracked sill moulding fell outside MBFS's own Vehicle Return Standards. The complaint was not upheld and the charges were deemed reasonable.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the balance of probabilities standard and assessed the charges against MBFS's own Vehicle Return Standards and industry guidelines. For the headlight, the extensive condensation indicated underlying damage or a compromised seal rather than normal wear and tear, particularly given evidence of previous repairs and unusual panel gapping. For the sill moulding, the VRS explicitly states that loose or cracked mouldings requiring replacement are unacceptable, and the inspection photograph confirmed this condition. Therefore, both charges were reasonable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website