The consumer’s issue:
“In November 2019, I bought a used 18-plate small SUV with just over 24,000 miles on the clock from a dealership. However, after just eight months of ownership, during which I drove 4,700 miles, the clutch failed on 9th July 2020. As I was sold a car that was deemed to be free of any faults, I expected there to be a reasonable timeframe before any issues occurred, but this was clearly not the case.
During a routine service two days before the failure on 7th July 2020, I was also advised the front two tyres were almost illegal to use, so I believe that I was sold a sub-standard vehicle. As a resolution to my complaint, I am looking for the dealership to cover the full costs of the repairs.”
The accredited business’ response:
- Our internal documents, such as the job card, as well as both the vehicle health check and the invoice for the annual service on 7th July 2020, showed that the consumer had not raised any issues relating to the clutch.
- Our second job card raised on 13th July 2020 showed that the vehicle was towed to our premises. On inspection, our technician found the clutch had been completely burnt out, indicating the vehicle was driven whilst it was slipping.
The adjudication outcome:
Clutch failure
- On inspection of the job cards, the Motor Ombudsman adjudicator noted the primary cause of the clutch failure was attributed to excessive wear and a heavily scorched flywheel – all were likely a result of repeated misuse of the vehicle.
- This therefore indicated that any defect with the clutch was likely not present at the point of sale, but was a result of the consumer’s use.
- The adjudicator also remarked the vehicle owner had failed to provide any technical evidence that refuted the business’ diagnosis i.e. that the defect with the clutch was present before purchase. Their claims were based solely on speculation.
- As a result, this element of the consumer’s complaint could not be upheld in their favour.
Illegal front tyres
- After reviewing the documents provided by both parties, the adjudicator found no evidence that demonstrated that there was any defect with the tyres that would render them illegal or unroadworthy.
- The vehicle health check showed the front tyres had worn to an average of less than 3mm. Manufacturer recommendations often advise tyre tread should be above 3mm, with the legal requirement being only 1.6mm.
- Overall, there was nothing to suggest the tyres on the vehicle were in an illegal state, meaning the adjudicator could not uphold this part of the complaint either.
Conclusion:
- The business accepted the adjudication outcome, but the consumer did not respond, thereby closing the case.
