The consumer’s issue:
“I took my car to the accredited garage for a service, and for it to be re-tested after a failed MOT. I then collected the vehicle and drove it as normal. However, three months later, I had a breakdown and the recovery service attended. They said it was an alternator issue and they would organise recovery. However, I was then told that my car didn’t have a valid MOT, and because this invalidated my breakdown cover, I’d have to pay £91. I showed the breakdown cover provider the invoice detailing the MOT, but I was told I would need to contact the garage. When I spoke to them, they said the system confirmed there should be a valid MOT. They then offered to carry out the MOT, but this was already being done at another garage. In light of this, I asked the accredited business to reimburse me for the costs of the MOT and service, as I had no confidence that the service had been carried out correctly either, plus the breakdown cover provider’s recovery fee. However, the accredited business refused.”
The accredited business’ response:
- We do not accept the consumer’s claim, as we carried out all work as contracted after the customer purchased our service and MOT package online.
- The vehicle failed its MOT because of a major fuel leak, which we were unable to repair, so it went to a third party for the work. The car was then returned to us for the service.
- The MOT retest was not carried out because when the consumer booked the service, it was not discussed that it needed one, and due to the volume of cars we see, we are unable to remember every job.
- We apologised to the consumer for the confusion, but we have carried out the contract as agreed.
- We are happy to offer a 50% refund of the cost of the invoice as a gesture of goodwill.
The adjudication outcome:
- The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator upheld the complaint in the consumer’s favour.
- Whilst they were satisfied that the service had taken place, it was accepted that the MOT retest wasn’t carried out, and the adjudicator believed that the responsibility for this should fall on the accredited garage, not the consumer.
- This was because the accredited business should have been aware that there was an outstanding MOT retest, whereas the consumer probably wouldn’t have realised that they had to specifically make the garage aware of this.
- The adjudicator recognised that, whilst the consumer was not stopped by the policy, their car insurance would have been invalidated alongside their breakdown cover.
- As such, the adjudicator awarded the consumer the cost incurred in having the MOT carried out elsewhere, the fee resulting from the breakdown cover being invalidated, as well as a pro-rata refund of insurance premiums for the period where the car was being driven illegally.
Conclusion:
- The consumer and accredited business accepted the adjudicator’s outcome, and the case was closed.
