A leading story on how the Financial Ombudsman agreed to set things right for a Van Driver.
Meet Mr. D, who had a complaint about a van he acquired under a hire purchase agreement with RCI Financial Services Limited, trading as Mobilize Financial Services (“Mobilize”). Let’s dive into the details of what happened.
In September 2022, Mr. D excitedly acquired a brand new van from Mobilize under a regulated hire purchase agreement. The van had a cash price of £33,291 and zero mileage, for which Mr. D paid a deposit and a balance of £22,589.
However, on the very day of collecting the van, Mr. D’s excitement turned into frustration when the van’s alarm kept going off. He immediately took the van back to the dealership for repairs.
The first attempt at fixing the issue was unsuccessful, and Mr. D had to return the van a second time. The dealership then ordered a new part for the van. In the meantime, Mr. D discovered several other problems with the van.
However, due to a lack of readiness on the dealership’s part, the van could not be repaired until January 2023. And when it was finally returned to him, Mr. D found that none of the faults had been fixed. To make matters worse, the same night the alarm started going off again. Fed up with the van, Mr. D rejected it and complained to Mobilize.
To Mr. D’s disappointment, Mobilize did not uphold his complaint. They claimed that Mr. D had never collected the van in January and that the alarm issue had been resolved with a new alarm. According to the dealership, none of the other reported faults had been investigated as Mr. D had not informed them. Feeling frustrated and stressed, Mr. D brought his complaint to our service.
Upon investigating the matter, our investigator found in favor of Mr. D. It was evident that Mr. D had collected the van in January and found the previous repair to be unsuccessful. Thus, he rightfully rejected the van.
The investigator ruled that the deposit and monthly payments be refunded, along with Mr. D’s insurance and tax costs, with an 8% simple interest per year. Additionally, the hire purchase agreement was to be removed from Mr. D’s credit file, and he was to be compensated £300 for his inconvenience.
However, this decision was not accepted by Mobilize. They argued that the videos Mr. D had provided as evidence had no time-stamp, and they could have been taken earlier. They also claimed that the dealership confirmed that Mr. D had not taken the van back for repairs in January. However, due to the conflicting evidence, the case was referred for an ombudsman’s decision.
After thoroughly considering all the evidence, the ombudsman upheld Mr. D’s complaint. The job card provided by Mobilize clearly listed several faults, which means that the dealership’s claim of Mr. D only reporting the alarm issue was unreliable.
The ombudsman was satisfied that all these faults were present at the time of sale and that the van was not of satisfactory quality. Thus, Mr. D was entitled to reject it.
In conclusion, the ombudsman’s final decision was in favor of Mr. D. Mobilize was ordered to cancel the agreement, refund all payments, including insurance, tax, and accessories purchased by Mr. D, with an 8% simple interest.
Compensation of £300 for Mr. D’s inconvenience was also mandated. Mr. D has until 25 October 2023 to accept or reject this decision.
We hope this resolves the dreadful van experience Mr. D had to endure and serves as a cautionary tale for all consumers.
Book Free Assessment
Schedule a meeting with us to have an impartial and transparent assessment with us.
