Upheld: failure to disclose material information / inadequate due diligence on vehicle mileage complaint against Zopa Bank Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6345691 of 2026-06-01T00:00:00+00:00. failure to disclose material information / inadequate due diligence on vehicle mileage complaint against Zopa Bank Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6345691 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-01T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Zopa Bank Limited |
| Product | hire purchase agreement |
| Claim type | failure to disclose material information / inadequate due diligence on vehicle mileage |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | 1. End hire purchase agreement with nothing further to pay; 2. Zopa to collect car at no cost to Ms D; 3. Zopa retains monthly repayments made until collection; 4. Refund £201 deposit; 5. Refund any amounts paid for checks such as HPI (with proof of payment); 6. Refund £300 ECU interrogation cost (with proof of payment); 7. Add 8% simple interest per year to all refunds from date of payment to settlement; 8. Pay £300 compensation for distress and inconvenience; 9. Remove adverse credit file information and mark agreement as settled in full, not voluntary termination. |
Summary
Ms D purchased a car via hire purchase with Zopa in February 2025 for £13,989. In June 2025, she discovered the car's MOT history contained significant mileage discrepancies, with recorded mileage varying between 29,699 and 43,321 miles across different years. Ms D was not informed of this discrepancy at point of supply and incurred £300 obtaining an ECU interrogation at Zopa's direction. Zopa refused to uphold her complaint, citing lack of evidence of odometer tampering. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding Zopa failed to conduct reasonable mileage checks and clearly disclose the discrepancy as required by consumer law guidance, and directed full rejection of the agreement with refunds and compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that although there was no evidence of deliberate odometer tampering, Zopa failed to conduct reasonable mileage checks as best practice guidance requires. The firm did not clearly disclose the mileage discrepancy to Ms D despite it being evident in available records. Under consumer law guidance, traders should take all reasonable steps to establish mileage accuracy and clearly bring any issues to the consumer's attention. The ombudsman concluded that had Ms D been informed of the discrepancy, she would not have acquired the car, making full rejection fair and reasonable.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Zopa Bank Limited, all decisions | 558 | 27% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website