Upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against MotoNovo Finance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs W purchased a used car via hire purchase with MotoNovo in May 2025 for £10,620 with a £2,000 deposit. Shortly after purchase, she experienced intermittent warning lights and later discovered the timing belt was worn and cracked. She also discovered the car did not have the full-service history she believed she had been told it possessed, with service records showing inconsistencies and only partial documentation available. MotoNovo arranged for the timing belt to be replaced at no cost and paid £250 compensation, but Mrs W remained unhappy. The ombudsman upheld her complaint, finding the car was not of satisfactory quality and had been misrepresented regarding its service history, and instructed MotoNovo to end the finance agreement, return the deposit with interest, and pay £350 total compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the timing belt fault meant the car was not of satisfactory quality at point of supply, which MotoNovo accepted. The ombudsman also found that Mrs W was told a false statement of fact that the car had a full-service history, evidenced by inconsistencies in the service records and the dealer's own correspondence suggesting a full-service history should exist. The ombudsman rejected MotoNovo's argument that Mrs W's delay in raising concerns about the service history meant it was not a deciding factor, finding instead that Mrs W had reasonably relied on the dealer's representation and only discovered the issue when warranty documentation was required. Because the misrepresentation induced Mrs W into the agreement, the fair remedy was to allow rejection of the car and end the finance agreement, with Mrs W paying for use through monthly payments reflecting the 9,000 miles driven.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website