Dent repair cost claim

The consumer’s issue:

“I took my compact SUV to the dealership after someone had dented my car, and they told me that it would cost around £480 to fix through a mobile dent repair company. The excess on my insurance is £800, and I was previously quoted £1,300 by a bodyshop.

The dealership advised that the person running the dent removal company was ill, but I contacted them directly after several weeks to find out that he had in fact been working. However, due to the time that had passed, I couldn’t now claim on my insurance for something that happened three months ago.

I therefore made a complaint to the business, and received an apology from head office, but this was not sufficient, as I have been making finance payments during this time. To resolve my complaint, I am looking for the dealership to fix the dent as a goodwill gesture, or to release me from my finance contract.”

The accredited business’ response:

  • The customer said that they didn’t have the £800 to pay the insurance company, so our salesperson mistakenly said that the dents could be removed by a third party at a cost of around £480.
  • This was incorrect, as the damage needed to be rectified by a bodyshop, leading to the customer to complain to the vehicle manufacturer.
  • After several conversations, we agreed to cover the £500 difference between the cost of the bodyshop repair (£1,300) and the £800 required by the insurance company.
  • The work at a third party bodyshop went ahead based on this agreement, and the vehicle was collected by the customer.

The adjudication outcome:

  • The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator noted that the consumer had the burden of proof to demonstrate that the costs they held the dealership responsible for, were due to a shortcoming in the advice provided to them.
  • The dealership did not automatically become responsible for repairing the car simply because guidance provided later proved inaccurate.
  • However, they did offer to pay the difference in the cost quoted to the consumer and the actual price of having the repairs completed.
  • Given that the business had already incurred a significant cost in resolving the issue to the customer’s satisfaction, and that The Motor Ombudsman does not award compensation, the adjudicator was satisfied that the dealership did not have to take any further action.

Conclusion:

  • Both the business and consumer accepted the adjudication outcome, and the case was closed.