The consumer’s issue:
“I purchased my car from the business in April 2018 and was informed that the vehicle was inspected prior to the sale. Four months after buying it, I needed to replace three tyres and a brake pad. I am unhappy as the inspection sheet shows the vehicle was inspected two months prior to the car being sold to me and I believe these items were not checked on the sale date and should have been changed. I am therefore seeking a refund of the cost of these repairs.”
The accredited business’ response:
- The vehicle was inspected in February under the Approved Used programme and was sold to the customer in April.
- The car had only travelled 144 miles during this period.
- The tyres and brake pads were within the limits of the Approved Used programme at the time and were therefore not replaced.
The adjudication outcome:
- The adjudicator highlighted the responsibility of the business under The Motor Ombudsman’s Vehicle Sales Code to ensure that vehicles are of satisfactory quality.
- However, the adjudicator noted that this was a used vehicle and some degree of wear is to be expected.
- In addition, the tyres and brake pads were within the tolerance of the Approved Used scheme and were well within the legal limits at the time the car was sold.
- The adjudicator therefore did not consider the vehicle to be of unsatisfactory quality when the customer bought the vehicle.
- She concluded that the car was of satisfactory quality and did not believe there was enough to question the validity of the inspection. As a result, the customer’s complaint was not upheld by The Motor Ombudsman.
Conclusion:
- The customer and accredited business accepted the adjudication outcome provided by The Motor Ombudsman and the case was closed.
