Partially upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Startline Motor Finance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C purchased a used car via hire purchase with Startline Motor Finance in November 2025. The car, approximately eight years old with 69,746 miles, developed multiple faults within two weeks including an oil leak, engine mount issues, and suspension problems. After the supplying dealer delayed repairs due to the Christmas break, Mr C arranged repairs at a main dealer garage at his own cost of £2,392.25. The ombudsman found the car was not of satisfactory quality under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and ordered Startline to refund £2,172.25 in repair costs plus £200 compensation for distress and inconvenience. However, the ombudsman rejected claims for the SOS system battery replacement (deemed wear and tear) and consequential losses, as the appropriate remedy of repair had been completed.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found the car was not of satisfactory quality under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 because multiple faults (oil leak, engine mount, suspension, exhaust fixings) were present or developing at time of supply and discovered within 30 days. While Mr C had a short-term right to reject, he chose repair instead, which was the appropriate remedy. The SOS system battery failure was attributed to natural wear and tear (five-year battery lifespan in an eight-year-old car) rather than a manufacturing fault, so Startline was not liable for that cost. The ombudsman considered Mr C's circumstances and found his decision to use a main dealer garage reasonable given the safety concerns and Christmas holiday delays. The repair cost was not shown to be excessive. However, consequential losses and additional costs were not Startline's responsibility as the appropriate remedy (repair) was completed.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website