The consumer’s issue:
“I contacted the dealership after seeing an advertisement for a car, which included a sports exhaust, suspension and heated seats. The business told me over the phone that the car did not have a sports exhaust or suspension, but I was still interested, so I paid a deposit of £450.
The business said they could apply protective coating, worth £350, free of charge with the purchase, which I accepted. I asked if the business could pick me up when collecting the car, and told them I would transfer the reserve payment in a few days’ time.
Furthermore, I informed them that, if I was happy with the car, I would want to take it away the very same day, and paid a part of the reserve price. I e-mailed the dealer to say I was getting insurance sorted for the car, and wanted to check that the purchase was dependent on viewing and driving it. They called to say that was fine, so I paid the full reserve amount of £4,000.
I then went to the dealer to pick up the car and found it did not have heated seats. The advertisement had already been taken down. As a result, I rejected the vehicle, and the business said they could offer a lower price if I still wanted it, but I refused. I was refunded the reserve amount of £4,000, but the business kept a £200 admin fee (from my £450 deposit) and £350 for the protective coating. They have since refunded the admin fee, but kept the cost of the coating, which I also want back.”
The accredited business’ response:
- The customer agreed to purchase the car from us, the deal was agreed on the information given, and as an extra, they asked for a protection coating to be applied.
- The consumer paid a deposit and the coating was added so that the car would be ready for collection.
- We collected the customer from the bus station as agreed, and brought them to our premises to view the car.
- The customer said they thought the vehicle had heated seats, but we knew this was not the case and was not what was advertised. We therefore checked the spec sheet before it was uploaded so we were aware of what it said, and neither the sales sheet, nor the spec sheet mentioned heated seats.
- As a result, the customer decided not to buy the car, so we refunded £4,000 for the reservation, but kept part of the deposit to cover administration costs and the protective coating which was added in time for the consumer to pick the car up.
The adjudication outcome:
- The business was required to make sure any advertisements objectively promoted vehicle models based upon relevant and verifiable features. They were required to be clear on the specifics of their vehicles and sales processes, including the terms of any contractual documents. Where a deposit was required, the terms and conditions needed to be made available.
- No evidence was provided to show that the car would have had heated seats or that the business has said this would be the case. It was not included in any of the correspondence provided. The spec sheet for the car did also not mention heated seats. It was considered that, on the balance of probabilities, there was not a breach of the Vehicle Sales Code in relation to the advertisement for this car.
- The business already refunded the reserve price to the consumer, but deducted costs from the deposit for administration and the preparation work prior to the purchase.
- The customer e-mailed asking if the deposit was subject to being able to view the car first. There was no evidence to show that the business agreed to release the deposit if the customer did not like the car when they saw it.
- The business arranged for a test drive, picked the customer up from the bus station and prepared the vehicle for collection by applying a protective coating to the car.
- The consumer said they did not sign or see any documents, but the e-mail chain provided clearly showed they agreed that there was a fee for securing the car.
- It was considered that it was clear that the full deposit would not be expected to be returned, and the business was entitled to retain administrative costs associated with preparing the vehicle for sale.
- The evidence submitted to The Motor Ombudsman therefore did not that the business provided incorrect information when advertising the car, or that they had not been clear in terms of the deposit and sales process.
- As a result, the consumer’s complaint was not upheld, and no award was made.
Conclusion:
- Neither party contested the adjudication outcome, and the case was closed.
