The consumer’s issue:
“In October 2021, I purchased a used ’17 plate hatchback for £11,200 (including interest) from a dealership on a four-year finance agreement. Around a year later, I was offered a company car through my work, so I wanted to sell my vehicle privately. However, whilst I was in the process of trying to sell it, I then found out that my vehicle did not have a full service history, but a partial one instead. I had not been informed about this at the point of purchase, which subsequently affected the resale value of the car.
As I was unable to sell the car privately at the full market value at the time, I had to instead, terminate the finance agreement by handing the vehicle back to the finance company. This meant that I suffered a loss of around £1,700 compared to if I had sold the car privately, and therefore, I think it is only fair that I am compensated for this by the seller.”
The accredited business’ response:
- We sold the consumer an approved used vehicle, which meant that we ensured that the car underwent the checks required by the manufacturer, and that the consumer was happy with the vehicle when buying it.
- We normally discuss the service history at the point of sale, and would have informed the consumer that there was a partial service history prior to taking ownership of the car.
- At this stage of the sales process, the customer did not ask any specific questions on the service history, and we did not hear from them until a year later.
- They wrote to us complain that they were not told about the extent of the service history, but if the customer can provide evidence that we have supplied them with false information, we would be more than willing to investigate the matter further.
- However, as we see it, we have not done anything wrong, and are therefore unable to provide any assistance with compensating them for their perceived loss on this occasion.
The adjudication outcome:
- The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator reviewed the evidence and representations submitted by both parties. She pointed out that the consumer had to demonstrate that they suffered a loss, and that they were not given the full service history at the point of sale.
- The customer sent the email correspondence received at the time they were making a complaint.
- The adjudicator saw that the business had previously sent the customer documentation by e-mail, which included the finance agreement, and the terms and conditions of sale.
- The adjudicator however, could not see any documents that outlined the car’s history, any MOT tests, or any historic documentation.
- In addition, the adjudicator remarked that there were no documents that signposted the consumer to a digital record of any kind, after the customer had specifically requested the vehicle history documentation.
- As a result, as there were no documents given to the consumer when they raised a complaint to the business, it was unlikely that these documents existed at the time of sale, meaning the adjudicator partially upheld the consumer’s complaint on this point.
- The adjudicator equally noted the consumer had said they had suffered a financial loss when handing the car back to the finance company, as they claimed that they would have achieved a higher amount if they had sold it privately.
- However, there was no evidence that the consumer had attempted to sell the vehicle, meaning the adjudicator was unable to uphold this element of the case in the consumer’s favour.
Conclusion:
- Both the business and the consumer agreed with the outcome, and the business apologised for not providing the service history. The case was then closed.
