Not upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods supplied under conditional sale agreement complaint against Santander Consumer (UK) Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H purchased a used plug-in hybrid car through a conditional sale agreement with Santander in September 2024 and complained the following day about vibration, loss of power, and slow battery charging. The dealership refused to allow rejection and offered to buy back the car instead. Mr H withdrew his complaint from Santander before an independent inspection could take place, stating he was pressured by the dealership who threatened to prevent him from financing another car. When Mr H complained again over a year later, Santander declined to investigate. The ombudsman did not uphold the complaint because, despite likely faults being present, there was no diagnostic evidence to establish the car was of unsatisfactory quality when supplied, and obtaining such evidence was no longer possible.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which requires goods to be of satisfactory quality when supplied. While the ombudsman acknowledged that faults were likely present (as evidenced by Mr H's complaint and decision to sell the car back), the presence of faults does not automatically mean the car was unsatisfactory given its age and mileage. The ombudsman noted that the issues could have had multiple causes (e.g., imbalanced wheel, discharged battery, charger issue) and that without diagnostic evidence or an independent inspection report, it cannot be established that the car was of unsatisfactory quality at the point of supply. Although Mr H withdrew his complaint under pressure from the dealership, this does not change the fact that no evidence of unsatisfactory quality exists, and obtaining such evidence is no longer possible as the car is no longer in his possession.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website