Partially upheld: Service failures generally complaint against BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES (GB) LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs M purchased an Approved Used BMW through a hire purchase agreement financed by BMW Financial Services in April 2025. She complained about two issues: tyre tread depth and the timing of a required service. The invoice stated the next service was due in February 2026, but Mrs M was notified a service was due in October 2025 and paid £948.56 to have it completed. The ombudsman found the invoice misrepresented the service due date, as the service history indicated it was due in October 2025 based on time, not mileage, and at the point of handover the service was due within six months. The ombudsman rejected the dealership's claim of a 4-month/4,000-mile standard and upheld the complaint regarding the service, ordering reimbursement of £948.56 plus 8% interest. The complaint regarding tyre tread depth was not upheld as the tyres exceeded BMW's 3mm minimum standard.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the invoice stating the next service was due in February 2026 constituted a misrepresentation because the service history clearly indicated the service was due in October 2025 based on time, not mileage. At the point of handover in April 2025, the next service was due within six months, falling within BMW's Approved Used standard. The ombudsman rejected the dealership's claim that a 4-month/4,000-mile standard applied, as this was not evidenced and contradicted the used car check which referenced a 6-month/6,000-mile standard. The ombudsman concluded the service should have been completed prior to handover. Regarding tyres, the ombudsman found no misrepresentation as the tyres exceeded BMW's 3mm minimum standard and the advert made no guarantee about tread depth.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website