Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Close Brothers Limited (trading as Close Brothers Motor Finance)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr R purchased a nine-year-old car under a conditional sale agreement with Close Brothers in October 2022 for £9,990. He complained in November 2022 about suspension issues and slipping gears but did not receive a response. He renewed his complaint in November 2025, seeking to reject the car and unwind the agreement. Close Brothers requested evidence of the issues but Mr R provided no supporting documentation. The ombudsman found the complaint not upheld, as the vehicle passed MOT inspections, remained in use for three years, and Mr R failed to provide persuasive evidence of any fault at the point of supply.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015 standard that goods must be of satisfactory quality at the point of supply, considering factors such as age, mileage, and price. The ombudsman found that Mr R failed to provide persuasive evidence of any fault with the car. The vehicle's successful MOT passes indicated it met minimum legal standards of roadworthiness at the point of sale and remained in use for three years covering 20,000 miles, suggesting it provided considerable service. Without supporting documentation of unsuccessful repairs or premature failure, the ombudsman could not conclude the vehicle lacked durability at the point of supply.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website