Not upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods / vehicle condition at point of supply complaint against Toyota Financial Services (UK) PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Miss C purchased a used car through a hire purchase agreement with Toyota Financial Services in August 2023. The vehicle was seven years old with 35,265 miles. Miss C subsequently experienced multiple problems including coolant leaks, suspension wear, brake wear, and electrical faults, and complained that the car was not of satisfactory quality and had been misrepresented. Toyota rejected the complaint, offering only £50 for delay. The ombudsman found that while the car had experienced various problems, these were consistent with ordinary wear and tear for a vehicle of its age and mileage, and there was insufficient evidence that any faults were present or developing at the time of supply. 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. For a used car, satisfactory quality must be assessed considering its age, mileage, price, and history. A seven-year-old car with 35,265 miles would reasonably be expected to require some repairs and maintenance. The fact that Miss C did not report significant issues for seven months and 4,000 miles suggested the car was durable at supply. While the car experienced various problems including suspension wear, brake wear, coolant system issues, and electrical faults, these were consistent with ordinary wear and tear rather than defects present at the time of supply. The 2020 thermostat leak was likely repaired at that time, as evidenced by the absence of ongoing coolant problems in subsequent MOTs. The dealer's pre-supply coolant flush and header tank replacement appeared to address routine maintenance rather than indicating a persistent defect. No mechanical reports or corroborating evidence demonstrated that problems were present or developing at the point of sale.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website