Partially upheld: goods not of satisfactory quality; failure to repair within reasonable time complaint against Santander Consumer (UK) plc trading as Santander Consumer Finance
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6387375 of 2026-05-28T00:00:00+00:00. goods not of satisfactory quality; failure to repair within reasonable time complaint against Santander Consumer (UK) plc trading as Santander Consumer Finance. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6387375 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-28T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Santander Consumer (UK) plc trading as Santander Consumer Finance |
| Product | conditional sale agreement (car finance) |
| Claim type | goods not of satisfactory quality; failure to repair within reasonable time |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | Santander must: (1) Reimburse the cost of repair work carried out by Business V (invoices dated 4 and 22 August 2023, totalling £408) if paid by Mr C, subject to satisfactory evidence; (2) Refund 1.5 months' worth of monthly rental payments (£313.56) for loss of use during July/August 2023 repairs; (3) Pay £150 compensation for distress and inconvenience. Interest at 8% simple per annum to be paid on items 1 and 2 from date of payment until settlement date. |
Summary
Mr C purchased a used 8+ year old car with 96,000+ miles via conditional sale agreement with Santander in July 2023. The vehicle immediately displayed a low coolant warning light upon collection, requiring multiple top-ups and subsequent repairs by Business V in August 2023 (costing £408). The vehicle was unavailable for approximately 5.5 weeks. Although the repairs appeared successful (vehicle passed MOT in June 2024 and covered 14,500 miles), the vehicle broke down in January 2025. An independent inspection concluded the breakdown was due to wear and tear, not defects present at sale. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in part, finding Santander liable for repair costs (if paid by Mr C), 1.5 months' lost rental payments (£313.56), and £150 compensation for distress, but not for the vehicle's later breakdown.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that whilst the vehicle had faults requiring repair within 30 days of supply (indicating defects were present or developing at point of sale), Mr C did not exercise his right to reject the vehicle within 30 days under Section 22(3) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Instead, he allowed repairs to proceed. The repairs carried out by Business V in August 2023 appear to have been successful, as evidenced by the MOT pass and subsequent mileage covered. The vehicle's breakdown in January 2025 (21 months after repairs) was found by the independent inspector to be due to wear and tear, not defects present at point of sale. However, Mr C is entitled to compensation for the period the vehicle was unavailable for repair and the distress caused in arranging those repairs.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Santander Consumer (UK) plc trading as Santander Consumer Finance, all decisions | 7 | 43% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website