Upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Moneybarn No.1 Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6468247 of 2026-07-06T00:00:00+00:00. Goods and services under S75 complaint against Moneybarn No.1 Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6468247 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-07-06T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Moneybarn No.1 Limited |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | Goods and services under S75 |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Moneybarn must: (1) collect car at no cost and either end the conditional sale agreement with nothing further to pay, or repair and deliver car at no cost (Mr C to choose within 28 days); (2) refund all payments made since 13 April 2026; (3) pay simple interest on refunds at Bank of England base rate plus 1% from date of each payment to settlement; (4) pay £250 compensation; (5) remove adverse credit file information reported to date. |
Summary
Mr C purchased a used car via conditional sale agreement with Moneybarn in December 2025. In February 2026, defects emerged and the car was found to be not of satisfactory quality. Moneybarn offered three options: dealership repair at no cost, rejection of car, or third party repair at dealership expense. Mr C chose the third party option, but Moneybarn initially appeared to accept this before refusing two days later on grounds the £4,437.40 quote was uneconomical (83% of car price). The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding Moneybarn's refusal of the third party repair justified but requiring refunds of all payments since Mr C was advised not to drive the car on 13 April 2026, plus £250 compensation for the error in appearing to accept then rejecting his choice.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman upheld the complaint because the car was admittedly not of satisfactory quality. While Moneybarn acted reasonably in offering repair or rejection options, it was necessary to refund Mr C for the period he could not use the car. The third party repair quote was uneconomical at 83% of the purchase price, so Moneybarn was justified in refusing that option. However, Moneybarn's error in appearing to accept then rejecting Mr C's choice warranted compensation for loss of expectation. £250 was considered fair compensation taking into account Mr C's anxiety, though not the £3,000-£5,000 claimed. Refunds of travel expenses, tax and insurance were not warranted as the payment refunds provided adequate compensation.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Moneybarn No.1 Limited, all decisions | 1,445 | 24% |
| Goods and services under S75, all decisions | 19,913 | 36% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 19,529 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website