Not upheld: unfair end of hire damage charges complaint against Hyundai Capital UK Limited trading as Hyundai Finance Contract Hire
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6334993 of 2026-06-03T00:00:00+00:00. unfair end of hire damage charges complaint against Hyundai Capital UK Limited trading as Hyundai Finance Contract Hire. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6334993 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-03T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Hyundai Capital UK Limited trading as Hyundai Finance Contract Hire |
| Product | hire agreement |
| Claim type | unfair end of hire damage charges |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman did not uphold the complaint and did not require Hyundai to take any further action. |
Summary
Mr H complained that Hyundai unfairly charged him £447.58 for vehicle damage at the end of his 48-month hire agreement. Hyundai had initially invoiced him for £1,374.62 but reduced this following Mr H's challenge. The remaining charges related to seven specific damage items assessed against BVRLA Fair Wear and Tear guidelines. Mr H argued the charges were disproportionate for cosmetic damage, the inspection was unreliable given the number of items removed, Hyundai failed to provide a pre-return inspection he requested, and the repair costs were excessive. The ombudsman found that the hire agreement clearly set out the terms for damage assessment using BVRLA guidelines, each remaining charge was justified, Hyundai was not obliged to provide a pre-return inspection, and Mr H had sufficient time to arrange his own inspection. The complaint was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that the hire agreement clearly set out the terms under which Mr H would be charged for repairs, including the use of BVRLA Fair Wear and Tear guidelines as the industry standard. The ombudsman reviewed each remaining charge against these guidelines and found them to be justified. The ombudsman rejected Mr H's arguments that: (1) the charges were disproportionate for cosmetic damage on an older vehicle, as the contract explicitly required the car to be returned in 'good condition' regardless of age; (2) the inspection report was unreliable, as Hyundai had appropriately reviewed and removed charges it couldn't substantiate; (3) Hyundai should have provided a pre-return inspection, as this was not part of the hire agreement and Mr H had sufficient time to arrange his own inspection; and (4) the repair costs were excessive, as commercial decisions about repair pricing were outside the ombudsman's remit.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Hyundai Capital UK Limited trading as Hyundai Finance Contract Hire, all decisions | 2 | 0% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website