Upheld: irresponsible lending / supply of goods not of satisfactory quality complaint against MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6429342 of 2026-06-15T00:00:00+00:00. irresponsible lending / supply of goods not of satisfactory quality complaint against MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6429342 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-15T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | irresponsible lending / supply of goods not of satisfactory quality |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | End conditional sale agreement with nothing further to pay; collect van at no cost to Mr W; refund all payments after 28 July 2025; refund £198 recovery costs and £126 diagnostic costs; refund road tax and insurance costs from 28 July 2025 onwards (upon proof); refund storage costs (upon proof or pay directly); refund £1,000 advance payment; add 8% simple interest per year to all refunds from date of payment to settlement; pay £250 compensation for distress and inconvenience; remove adverse credit file information and mark agreement as settled in full (not voluntary termination). |
Summary
Mr W purchased a used van via conditional sale agreement with Moneybarn in March 2025 for £5,994 (approximately 5.5 years old with 71,668 miles). The van broke down after 4 months with a significant timing chain fault requiring approximately £4,000 in repairs. Moneybarn rejected the complaint, arguing a manufacturer recall should have prompted Mr W to arrange inspection. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding the van was not of satisfactory quality when supplied, as a reasonable person would not expect such significant faults to arise so quickly. Moneybarn was directed to end the agreement, refund payments after the breakdown date, refund associated costs, pay £250 compensation, and remove adverse credit file information.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015 standard of satisfactory quality, considering the van's age (5.5 years), mileage (71,668 miles at supply), and price (£5,994). A significant fault requiring £4,000 repair arising within 4 months of supply was deemed unreasonable for a reasonable person to expect, indicating the fault was present or developing at point of supply. The recall notice argument was rejected because Mr W did not receive notice before breakdown and even if he had, the timeframe was too short to expect him to arrange inspection and avoid failure. The ombudsman concluded the van was not of satisfactory quality when supplied, making Moneybarn responsible under the CRA.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| MONEYBARN NO.1 LIMITED, all decisions | 1,419 | 24% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 18,521 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website