Upheld: goods not of satisfactory quality; breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015; failure to repair within reasonable time complaint against MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6380928 of 2026-05-22T00:00:00+00:00. goods not of satisfactory quality; breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015; failure to repair within reasonable time complaint against MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6380928 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-22T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED |
| Product | conditional sale agreement (car finance) |
| Claim type | goods not of satisfactory quality; breach of Consumer Rights Act 2015; failure to repair within reasonable time |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Moneybarn must: (1) end the finance agreement and refund any overpayments for monthly rentals after collection; (2) take back the car without charging for collection; (3) reimburse the £1,500 deposit from 20 December 2024 with 8% simple yearly interest; (4) reimburse 25% of repayments from 3 March 2025 to 18 May 2025 with 8% simple yearly interest; (5) reimburse all repayments after 18 May 2025 with 8% simple yearly interest; (6) pay £500 compensation for distress and inconvenience (in addition to the £200 already offered, totalling £700); (7) remove any adverse information from Mrs K's credit file relating to this agreement. |
Summary
Mrs K purchased a used 8-year-old car with 69,000 miles under a conditional sale agreement with Moneybarn for £23,790 in December 2024. From March 2025, the car developed significant intermittent faults with the dashboard displaying multiple warning lights and the rev counter acting erratically. Despite reporting these issues to the dealer and later complaining to Moneybarn, the car was not repaired. An independent inspection in July 2025 found no faults, but the inspector had been briefed on the wrong issue (door seals rather than dashboard). In September 2025, the dealer began replacing the dash and discovered a body control module failure, confirming the fault existed. Mrs K rejected the car in September 2025 and has been without it for approximately one year. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding the car was not of satisfactory quality under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and Mrs K had the right to reject it because repairs were not completed within a reasonable time. Moneybarn was instructed to end the finance agreement, take back the car, refund all payments with interest, and pay £700 in compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that despite the independent inspection report showing no faults, the contemporaneous evidence from Mrs K (text messages, photos, and videos) clearly demonstrated the car had a significant intermittent fault with the dashboard and rev counter from 3 March 2025. The fact that the inspector was not briefed on the correct issue to investigate undermined the reliability of that report. The subsequent dash replacement in September 2025 confirmed a fault existed. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, goods must be of satisfactory quality, and a reasonable person would expect a £24,000 car to be free from such defects and provide trouble-free motoring. The fault appeared well under three months after purchase, suggesting it was present or developing at the point of supply. Even if repairs were later attempted, Mrs K had the right to reject the car because the repair was not completed within a reasonable time (approaching four months) and caused significant inconvenience without a courtesy car being provided. Mrs K validly rejected the car in September 2025.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED, all decisions | 1,419 | 24% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website