The consumer’s issue:
“I took my vehicle to a Motor Ombudsman-accredited business in November 2019 to have a tyre replaced. When collecting my car, I noticed damage to one of the alloy wheels. When I raised the issue, the business refused to replace the alloy or cover the cost of the replacement. In addition to the damaged wheel, I was made to wait an excessive amount of time before my vehicle was looked at, the steering wheel was left at a 45-degree angle after a wheel alignment was completed, and a tyre valve was not installed correctly, meaning it was leaking air.
I therefore had to return the following day to have the vehicle looked at, and the manager apologised for the wheel alignment and leaking valve. They also acknowledged the damaged wheel and said that head office would issue a refund for the cost of repairing it, along with an apology. However, this never happened.
To resolve my complaint, I am seeking a full refund of £108 to cover the repair to the alloy wheel that I subsequently had to pay, and a written apology from head office.”
The accredited business’ response:
- We accept that we caused damage to the alloy wheel whilst replacing the tyre.
- However, the alloy wheel in question had other damage marks, and therefore we could only contribute £68 towards the cost of a full refurbishment.
- This is because any other figure would be classed as betterment due to the age of the vehicle and the existing damage.
The adjudication outcome:
- Having considered the evidence provided by both sides, The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator found that there was a breach of the Code of Practice for Service and Repair, as the information demonstrated that the business failed to use reasonable skill or care during the tyre replacement.
- Whilst the accredited business had offered to partially contribute towards the repair cost, the adjudicator did not find this to be reasonable, as the accredited business was unable to demonstrate the alloy wheel had any other previous damage, apart from the damage caused by them.
- Considering that the accredited business admitted fault, it was recommended that the business should cover the entire cost of repair, equating to the sum of £108 that the consumer had previously paid out to rectify this issue.
- The adjudicator also recommended that the accredited business issued a written apology to the customer for the inconvenience caused by this matter.
- The complaint was therefore upheld by the adjudicator in the consumer’s favour due to a breach of the Service and Code.
Conclusion:
- Both parties accepted the adjudication outcome, and the consumer received a reimbursement of £108 and an apology. The case was then closed.
