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

Decision detail

Summary

Mr D purchased a used 8-year-old car via hire purchase from Marsh Finance Limited in July 2024. After reporting engine issues in December 2024, Marsh arranged repairs including timing belt replacement. When further issues arose in July 2025, Marsh's independent inspection confirmed the problems were linked to the earlier unsuccessful repair. Marsh requested a repair quote but failed to clearly communicate requirements or engage effectively with Mr D, who has communication difficulties and preferred phone contact. After months without use of the car and repeated unsuccessful attempts to contact Marsh, Mr D arranged repairs himself in November 2025 at a cost of £1,059.87. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding Marsh responsible for the repair costs, loss of use repayments, and compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by poor complaint handling.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Marsh had responsibility under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 to supply goods of satisfactory quality and to repair the car at no cost to Mr D. Although the car was 8 years old with 61,000 miles, Marsh had already accepted it was not of satisfactory quality and that later issues stemmed from an unsuccessful earlier repair. The ombudsman found it reasonable for Mr D to arrange repairs himself given his loss of confidence in the original repairer and Marsh's failure to clearly communicate next steps. The ombudsman noted Marsh did not initially specify a VAT-registered garage requirement and that Mr D made genuine attempts to contact Marsh by phone despite communication difficulties. The mileage and MOT records supported Mr D's account that the car was off the road for the full period claimed. Marsh provided no comparable quotes to challenge the repair cost's reasonableness.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website