Rejecting a New or Used Car on Finance
You can reject a car on finance if it is faulty. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 gives you a short-term right to reject within the first 30 days for a full refund and a final right to reject if a repair fails after that. Because the finance company legally supplied the vehicle, it is jointly responsible with the dealer so you can pursue either. Stormcatcher Law acts for owners whose rejection has been refused.
This page is about rejecting a faulty vehicle you have bought on finance, not rejected finance applications. That is a separate issue and not addressed on this page.
Has a car dealer or finance company refused your rejection of a new or used car under consumer rights law? If they have, you are not alone, and our team can help you. Requests for advice on rejecting cars bought on finance keep rising, though the true scale is largely unreported. It’s been estimated that approximately 43,000 people were helped by Citizens Advice in 2023 regarding used car complaints and their rights as used car buyers. In the 2024 Motor Ombudsman report, it stated that demand for help is growing. When the dealer doesn’t listen, and the finance company passes the buck, we step in and pursue the claim on your behalf.
Call for First Free Advice
Reasons for Rejecting a Car on Finance
You can reject a car on finance on any grounds that stop it operating normally. Engine, gearbox, steering, suspension or braking problems can all leave a car unfit for purpose. When you buy a car on finance, it should be expected to perform just like any other car of similar age, mileage and price.
Where you cannot reject a financed car is when the problems are minor and the dealer is obliged to correct them. Things such as inconsistent air conditioning, a blown bulb or a small scratch on the door are not, on their own, grounds for rejection. What matters is whether the fault causes the car to fall below the standard a reasonable person would expect given its age, mileage, price and description.
The right to reject is established in consumer law. Our consumer rights specialists regularly advise clients on the consumer law right to reject a faulty car, clarifying when you are entitled to a refund, repair or replacement, and how to see those rights enforced correctly against dealers and finance companies.
Consumer Rights When Rejecting a Car on Finance
The Consumer Rights Act 2015 protects you if the car you bought on finance turns out to be faulty. One important caveat is that this only applies to sales through a trader, not private sales. The car must be of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and sold as described. You can take action if it falls short of those in accordance with this legislation.
There is a point that trips people up, so we say it plainly: when a car is bought on finance, the finance company has supplied you with the goods and carries the same statutory obligations as the dealer. You have direct rights against the finance company for any breach of satisfactory quality. In certain circumstances under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the lender is jointly and severally liable for the dealer’s misrepresentation or breach of contract. In practice, that means if the dealer is unresponsive, or has stopped trading, you can bring your claim against the finance company instead.
When you successfully reject a vehicle on finance, the legal remedy is to “unwind” the agreement: the finance company refunds the payments you have made, including the deposit and monthly instalments, and you return the vehicle. If the dealer or lender resists that outcome, it is exactly the kind of claim we pursue.
How to Reject a Car on Finance
The way you reject a car on finance will depend on how much time has passed since the finance agreement started.
Short Term Right to Reject a Car on Finance
You have a statutory right to reject a new or used car on finance within 30 days of taking delivery. If a fault was present when you bought the car, or a problem was developing at that point, and you can prove it, you can reject the car within those 30 days for a full refund. You do not have to accept a repair or replacement first, although you can if you wish.
The right applies against the supplier, which in this case would be the dealer and the finance company, but not the manufacturer.
If the 30-day window is closing, and the dealer or finance company is stalling, tell us. Our team works quickly to help protect your rights.
Final Right to Reject a Car on Finance
If a fault is only noticeable after the 30 days but before you have had the vehicle for six months, you are entitled to a repair or replacement. You can give the dealer the opportunity to repair or replace your faulty car bought on finance. If that is unsuccessful, you are entitled to a refund, although this refund may be lower than the listed selling price as the seller can make reasonable reductions based on the use you have already had from the vehicle.
If the dealer or lender states that more than one repair is necessary, we take on this pushback, holding both parties to the one-attempt rule.
Rejecting a car on finance comparison
| | Short-term right to reject | Final right to reject |
| Timeframe | Within 30 days of delivery | After 30 days and usually within the first 6 months |
| What you must prove | The fault was present or developing at the point of sale | The same, plus that a repair or replacement has failed |
| Remedy | Full refund | Refund, but seller may deduct for use |
| Repair first? | No, you can reject outright | Yes, the dealer gets one attempt |
| Who to notify | The dealer and the finance company | The dealer and the finance company |
Rejecting a Car on Finance After 6 Months
You can still reject a car on finance after six months, but it does come with significant challenges as the burden of proof is now yours rather than the dealers or lenders. Within the first six months, the law presumes any fault was present at the point of sale, and the dealer has to prove otherwise. After six months, it is down to you to show that the defect existed when the car was delivered rather than developing later through misuse or normal wear.
This distinction matters. Proving a fault was there at the point of sale, months and quite often, thousands of miles later may need a report from an independent engineer as well as a clear record of the issue and the attempts made to repair it. The more time that has passed, the more evidence you’ll need.
Because the car was bought on finance, the finance company supplied the goods and is directly responsible for their quality under the Consumer Rights Act. That responsibility does not depend on the value of the car, so it applies just as much to a high-value vehicle. This is the point at which many owners give up, having been told by the finance company and dealer that the law is now against them. It isn’t that straightforward, and that is where our experience helps. We assess whether evidence supports the claim, and where it does, we pursue the finance company to have the agreement unwound.
-
Rejection achieved for faulty Mercedes AMG GT 63
The Consumer Rights Act explains that if a vehicle becomes faulty (more than a minor fault) within 6 months of delivery, it is presumed to have been faulty from the outset. On the other hand, the dealer or finance company can potentially provide evidence which proves the vehicle wasn’t faulty on delivery, or that the…
-
Rejection upheld by Ombudsman for Range Rover Sport fire
Being involved in a situation where your car spontaneously catches fire is a frightening experience. Vehicle fires are fierce, causing significant damage to both the vehicle and adjacent property. For vehicle owners, the shock and distress are only matched by the surprising difficulty in getting car dealerships, manufacturers and finance companies to accept liability. Often,…
-
Claim settled: a missold Mercedes-Benz
Faulty car litigation can be a very expensive, lengthy and stressful process. Because of this, strategy, experience and specialist knowledge of the subject vehicle, which in this case is a Mercedes-Benz car, can prove decisive. This is never truer than when you’re up against a defendant who is an experienced car dealer specialising in buying…
-
Refund settlement negotiated for Toyota Land Cruiser 300 Sahara 3.3D
Because the legal rules are different when something goes wrong with a vehicle bought for and by your business, disputes can be tricky. However, it’s not easy to disclaim liability for misrepresentation especially if the supplying dealer has clearly falsely described something. This was the case involving a Toyota Land Cruiser 300 Sahara imported from…
-
Dealer agrees to refund for a Jaguar DPF problem they failed to fix
People say they can fix the problem with a DPF- a diesel particulate filter- not regenerating properly and becoming blocked, by replacing it and that the effects of poor historical servicing can be reversed. They’re wrong. When you complaint about the vehicle going into limp mode, exhaust gases entering the cabin and the dashboard lighting…
-
Buyer success with motorhome dealer dispute
It has been said that 80% of claims and disputes are resolved on the evidence. But determining what is evidence and who bears the evidential burden of proof is not always as easy as it sounds. It is a central principle of English law that the person making a claim or complaint bears the burden…
-
Refund secured for faulty motorhome
If you return your motorhome to the supplying dealer because of restricted performance and an engine management light coming on and the dealer tells you that they can’t find a fault with it, what are your rights if the problem occurs again, and a fault is found? Can the customer reject the motorhome or are…
-
Buyer refunded for faulty Volkswagen camper conversion
A motor dealer which promotes itself as being a specialist in converting and selling VW Campervans and Transporter vans can’t be surprised if customers hold them and their products to a higher standard than a standard dealership. If the quality doesn’t meet that standard, and the dealer doesn’t deal with complaints properly, they can’t be…
-
Cloned car sale leads to full refund for buyer
Car cloning is a fraud and is the process of disguising the identity of a stolen vehicle by using the number plates, VIN and logbook of a legitimate vehicle of similar make and model. In short, there will be more than one car on the road with the same ID. This is what happened in…
-
Car Finance company decision overturned by the Financial Services Ombudsman.
Establishing who bears the burden of proving the various aspects of a legal case is often more challenging than it appears; get it wrong and you could be asked to prove something you don’t have to or worse, something you can’t prove, like a negative. This is at the centre of this case involving a…
-
Finance agreement unwound because of a failed repair
The reliance on vehicle inspection reports by Automotive Consulting Engineers, commonly known as ACE, and reports by car finance companies has become part and parcel of investigating faulty car complaints. But these reports have come to be interpreted as fact rather than evidence, and have become determinative of whether to uphold a complaint or not…
-
FOS upholds refund complaint for failed Jaguar F-Pace engine after twelve months.
Car finance companies and car dealers commonly rely on expert evidence from vehicle inspection firms to determine whether to uphold or decline vehicle quality complaints. Mostly, no one actually reads the report, focussing instead on the conclusion, “We do not consider the condition to have been developing at inception.” But engineer reports aside, surely common…
-
Car rejection based on the issue of reasonable time and significant inconvenience- a success story
Under s23 Consumer Rights Act, the trader must complete the repair free of charge, within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the customer. But what constitutes a reasonable time and significant inconvenience? In law, this is not defined, apart from taking account of the nature of the goods and the purpose for which the…
-
Successful rejection of remapped and modified Mercedes AMG C63
Vehicle modification and remapping are widespread and often not declared by the seller, leaving the buyer none the wiser until something goes wrong. By which time, if outside the 6-month Consumer Rights Act, it can be difficult to prove when the car was remapped and modified. This was the basis of Mrs M’s complaint to…
-
Money back for material misrepresentation of Bentley Continental GT bought from a luxury car dealer
Because of potentially punitive repair and maintenance costs, provenance is central to the desirability and market value of high-performance and luxury cars. This leads most people preferring to buy from specialist car dealerships for peace of mind and a greater degree of certainty about the servicing and maintenance costs. It was precisely this reason that…
-
Financial Ombudsman upholds the right to reject Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio
It is a widespread belief that the offer or supply of a courtesy mitigates the requirement (a) to complete vehicle repairs in a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience and (b) refund monthly finance payments. CA Auto Finance shared this view, and that as the attempted repairs on the Alfa were carried out under the…
-
Cancelled Bentley Bentayga bought by a distance sale contract
Distance selling regulations were brought in to increase retail opportunities beyond the geographic limitations of the trading premises, but also while protecting interests of consumers from either mis-selling or mis-describing goods when buying online, and they have a 14-day cooling-off period. These issues are at the centre of this case involving the purchase of a…
-
Complaint upheld for Approved Used BMW Hybrid Electric range depletion
Concerns about second hand Hybrid and electric vehicle battery range because of high voltage battery degradation presents a significant concern for buyers. The problem is that although EV batteries lose capacity and range over time there is little or no information about the rate they lose charge and by how much the electric range depletes.…
-
Car Dealership refunds the cost of repairs to BMW 530e plug-in hybrid
Have you been told you can’t claim from the selling dealer the cost of unauthorised car repairs by a main dealer? The idea behind this is twofold: Some car dealers and their lawyers have interpreted the law to mean that they have a right to repair a car which is become faulty after 30 days…
-
Negotiated settlement of Jaguar F-Pace mileage discrepancy dispute
Evidence is pivotal to all legal claims and disputes, but what constitutes evidence, what has to be proven and by who often misunderstood. This is never truer that in cases involving car finance complaints and especially those which are made outside the six months of purchase. This was the central issue in this case involving…
-
Money back for Range Rover Sport 3.0SDV6 crankshaft bearings failure
When it comes to cars and car engines, low mileage doesn’t always mean low risk and long life, and just because you’ve bought a warranty doesn’t mean it’s worth the paper it’s written on. As the risk of owning a Range Rover increases so does the willingness decrease for warranty companies and dealerships to comply…
-
FOS upholds rejection of Range Rover 3.0D Hybrid
The interaction between statutory and legal rights, used car warranties and manufacturer guarantees is often a bone of contention between dealerships, finance companies and customers. Almost without exception, where the buyer has owned the car for 7 or 8 months the trader will suggest liability under the manufacturer’s guarantee for a particular part will take…
-
Dealer declines responsibility for Discovery Sport stretched timing chain rejection claim.
A stretched Discovery timing chain can lead to a noisy engine, misfire, restricted performance and potentially engine failure. Ingenium 2.0L Jaguar Land Rover cars seem susceptible to timing chain stretch, but that can be caused by poor servicing and reduced lubrication, whether due to Dpf related issues, oil dilution or blocked oil ways. Car dealers…
-
Consumer’s Right to Reject when Land Rover Discovery engine seized & turbo failed
The Discovery 5 and Discovery sport are prone to early service warnings and the need for the increased frequency of engine oil and filter replacement because of oil dilution. Because oil dilution can lead to accelerated wear and failure of engine parts and ultimately the engine seizing, regular servicing is crucial. If the Discovery has…
-
The Financial Ombudsman upholds the right to reject the Jaguar I-Pace
Introduction This is a case involving a faulty Jaguar I-Pace, an EV, bought by Mr T, from Marshall Jaguar Oxford for around £50.000.00 by way of a 60-month car finance agreement with Jaguar Financial Services (Black Horse). Mr T tried to reject it around 18 months after taking delivery. Black Horse, the finance company, issued…
-
Mr A – Complaint Against Blackhorse
Mr A bought an approved used BMW on finance with Blackhorse for around £15,000. Mr A had the car serviced as required but 2 years after taking delivery of the vehicle the timing chain prematurely failed, causing catastrophic engine failure and requiring its replacement at a cost of around £8,000. The vehicle type had a…
-
Mr A – Complaint Against Alphera
Mr A bought a brand new Range Rover Velar from a dealership on finance. After a couple of weeks, the vehicle started leaking fuel onto his driveway. Additionally, a fault was reported relating to the vehicle “Incontrol” system which failed to accurately record the fuel level, indicating it to have “half a tank” when empty…
-
Ms H – Complaint Against BMW Financial Services
Ms H bought an approved used ex-demonstrator BMW X6 M50d from a BMW dealership by way of a regulated consumer finance agreement. Around a year later and having had the car serviced in accordance with the manufacturer’s service schedule, the engine suffered catastrophic failure. Subsequent diagnostic testing revealed the car had suffered “flood damage” which…
-
Ms E v MK Auto-Motors Ltd
Ms E bought a 2008 Audi A3 from a dealer MK for £6000. The Audi is fitted with a DSG gearbox which uses the mechatronic system which in effect consists of an electronic control unit attached to the outside of the gearbox which controls the internal dual clutch system. After owning the car for a…
-
Mr U v a Motor Finance Company
Mr U saw a Mercedes-Benz Benz GLS 350d AMG LINE for being offered for sale on Autotrader and went to view it. The Mercedes was 2 years old at the time and it was therefore implied that it had 1 year of the manufacturer’s warranty left, so Mr U agreed to buy it for close…
-
Ms P v Long Term Horsebox Hire Company
Ms P is a successful, prize-winning international showjumper who rides her own highly prized and valuable thoroughbred horses as well as those owned by her celebrity clientele. In the furtherance of her sport, Ms P, required a larger Horsebox with accommodation facilities and decided to hire rather than buy one, simply as even a good…
-
Mrs W v Land Rover Financial Services
Mr & Mrs W bought brand new Land Rover Evoque in 2017 by way of a Hire Purchase Agreement with Blackhorse Financial Services trading as Land Rover Financial Services. Mr & Mrs W also bought a 3 year service plan from the supplying dealer. The Range Rover was serviced a year later in accordance with…
-
Mr & Mrs W (a Financial Ombudsman Service Matter)
Mr & Mrs W bought a brand new Volkswagen Tiguan R-Line 4motion 2.0 Tdi 190ps DSG from a VW Main dealer in March 2017 by way of a regulated consumer HP agreement. On delivery, Mr & Mrs W became concerned about a strange and unusual “grating” noise from the gearbox which they reported to the…
-
Ms H v MotoNovo Finance
Ms H bought a Nissan Qashqai from Witham Vehicle Solutions Ltd for £12000 at the end of 2018 by way of a regulated hire purchase agreement. Soon after taking delivery, the car engine developed a “knocking noise,” a strong smell of fuel from under the bonnet and excessive fuel consumption. Witham Vehicle Solutions inspected the…
-
Mr A v BMW Financial Services
Mr A acquired a brand new BMW 640i M Sport Convertible in July 2018 for nearly £70,000 by way of a hire purchase agreement from BMW Financial Services. Almost immediately after taking delivery of the Vehicle Mr A experienced problems with it which the supplying dealer tried to repair. However, this was just the first…
-
Mr M V Santander Consumer (UK) PLC
Mr M bought a 2011 Land Rover Discovery 3.0L from a car dealer by way of a 60-month conditional sale agreement with Santander consumer finance in March 2018. As a widower, he serviced and maintained the Discovery impeccably, as he needed the Land Rover to make regular trips to the hospital with his young daughter,…
-
Mr M v Wren Prestige Ltd
Mr M bought a Porsche Boxster from Wren Prestige Ltd for around £12000, part-exchanging his BMW. The Porsche was advertised as a low mileage example with around 45000 miles on the clock and having good service history, three services carried out by a Porsche main dealer and two by Porsche specialists. After taking delivery of…
-
Dr C v BMW Financial Services
Dr C acquired a used BMW X5 eDrive MSport plug-in electric hybrid car from a specialist BMW dealership for £31,750 by way of a 49-month hire purchase agreement with BMW Financial Services (BMWFS) in November 2019. The BMW X5 was represented as having a range of up to 31 kilometres (approx. 19 miles) in the…
-
Ms S – Complaint About a Lamborghini
Ms S bought a Lamborghini from a dealer for over £100,000 by way of a hire purchase agreement. Soon after taking delivery Ms S experienced difficulties in starting the car and issues in changing gear and it was returned to the dealer, who in turn submitted it to a Lamborghini main dealer. They performed a…
-
Ms M – Complaint Against Motonovo
Ms A bought a used car for £11,940 from a trader by way of a regulated hire purchase agreement with Motonovo through a third party broker. A month or so after delivery, Ms A reported the vehicle suspension spring required replacement, a suspected oil leak repair, a noisy heater, air conditioning functional issues, anti-roll bar…
-
Mr S – Complaint Against Blue Motor Finance
Mr S bought a used BMW M5 from a dealer for around £28,000, which he financed through Blue Motor Finance. Soon after taking delivery the vehicle suffered a sudden and complete loss of power and engine failure, resulting in it being recovered to BMW specialist. This revealed that the cause was more likely than not…
Can you reject a brand new car on finance?
Yes. You can reject a brand new car on finance, just like you can a used one. They are not exempt from the Consumer Rights Act, and if anything, the standard is higher. A brand-new vehicle is assumed to be in full working order and held to a higher standard of quality than a used vehicle. Where a fault could be argued away on a used car, it is much harder for a dealer or finance company to do this with a new car.
A common tactic is for a dealer to claim that the fault is “within manufacturer tolerance.” Put simply, this is a way of acknowledging a fault but saying this level of fault is acceptable and possibly expected. This is not something that overrides your rights. If the vehicle is not of satisfactory quality or fit for purpose, you remain within your rights to reject it.
New cars also bring an added degree of confusion due to the manufacturer's warranty. The warranty is separate from, and additional to, your rights under the Act. So, if a dealer pushes you towards a warranty repair, your right to reject remains intact where the law allows it. If a serious fault appears within the first 30 days, the short-term right applies to a new car exactly as it does to a used one. When a dealer pushes the tolerance or warranty argument to avoid a rejection, speak to us. We set out the legal grounds and pursue the claim.
How to reject a car on finance
How you reject a car on finance depends on how long you have had it, but the core steps remain the same. Rejection is a legal solution for a breach of contract, not simply a request, so it must be expressed and evidenced to take effect.
- Stop using the vehicle where practical: Continued use could weaken any rejection claim, particularly within the 30-day window.
- Notify in writing, within the window: Set out the fault and state clearly that you are exercising your right to reject. Do this within 30 days for the short-term right, or promptly when a repair has failed.
- Notify the finance company, not just the dealer: Because the lender supplied the goods, your rejection must reach them too. Notifying only the dealer is a common and costly mistake.
- Gather evidence: Keep the finance agreement, all correspondence, service and repair records and where possible, an independent engineer's report confirming the fault.
- Set out your legal grounds: State which right you are relying on (short-term or final) and why the car breaches the Consumer Rights Act. A formal rejection notice or letter before action holds more weight than simply asking for a refund.
- Record deadlines and responses: Note when you gave notice and chase written replies, so any delay or refusal is documented.
- Escalate: If the dealer or finance company rejects your claim, the next step is the Motor Ombudsman, the Financial Ombudsman Service or legal action.
If the dealer or finance company refuses your rejection at any stage, instruct an automotive lawyer to write a formal letter on your behalf.
Rejecting a car purchased privately and not on finance
Private purchases are far less protected. The Consumer Rights Act does not apply to a sale between two private individuals, and the principle of caveat emptor, buyer beware, largely governs. That said, the Misrepresentation Act 1967 still offers some cover, because a private seller must not misrepresent the car in the advertisement or in what they tell you.
For example, if a private seller failed to disclose damage from a previous accident, serious service history issues or a change of owner, you may be able to reject and pursue legal action if they refuse to take the car back. The same is true if the car is not roadworthy. If the car is not as described, you can claim the difference between what you paid and what the car is worth or request the cost of putting it right.
Why rejecting a car on finance is difficult
Rejecting a car on finance is rarely straightforward. Dealers and finance companies handle these claims every day and are well practised in resisting them and using various terms to confuse you and make you believe you have no legal grounds to pursue. Because the finance company is jointly responsible for the car’s quality, pursuing the lender is often the more effective route if the dealer fails to communicate or ceases trading.
Independent expert advice helps
The dealer will not accept your rejection on your say-so or on a recital of the Consumer Rights Act. You need proper evidence you can prove, and an independent engineer’s report carries far more weight than any attempt to try and outsmart the seller. The average high-street solicitor is also unlikely to have specific automotive law knowledge or the technical aspects of a vehicle. Quite often, neither does the dealer's legal representation. The better evidence and support you have, the better your chances.
Experience of dealing with vehicle dealerships
This will not be the dealership's first complaint, and they’ll have a strategy in place to manage unhappy customers. Unfortunately, this often leaves a customer blindsided and not leaving with the resolution they are ultimately hoping for. Using a team like ours helps you keep your claim on track.
The cost of going it alone
Dealers know that fighting a claim is expensive, and that many customers may baulk at potential costs of making a claim. Many owners utilise the Motor Ombudsman or Financial Ombudsman. These are free services, but sellers and lenders are wise to this, so professional advice is recommended, especially when it's weighted in your favour.
Philip Harmer, automotive lawyer
Philip Harmer leads Stormcatcher Law, working as a lawyer and arbitrator with extensive knowledge of the automotive industry. Using that insight and years of experience, he offers straight-talking advice you can act on. He knows the trade and the rules inside out, making him the right person to have in your corner.
We handle rejection cases across a wide range of makes and models with particular focus on luxury and performance vehicles including Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Porsche and Volkswagen among many others.
Why choose Stormcatcher Law?
Having the right advice when pursuing car rejection can make all the difference. Stormcatcher Law is well placed to provide it, handling both new and used car complaints with a straightforward, knowledgeable approach, and settling disputes outside the courtroom wherever possible.
If you want to reject a car bought on finance and want to know your rights and how to enforce them, call us for free advice before you complain about the dealer/lender to the Motor Ombudsman. As motor trade and car experts specialising in vehicle dispute resolution, we know the rules, the cars and the trade.
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes. If the car is faulty, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 lets you reject it, and because the finance company supplied the goods, it is jointly responsible with the dealer. You have the full right to reject within 30 days and a final right to reject if a repair fails after that.
Yes, but it is harder. After six months, the burden of proof shifts to you to show the fault was present when the car was delivered rather than developing later. An independent engineer’s report usually becomes essential, and, because the finance company supplied the car, it remains responsible for its quality under the Consumer Rights Act, whatever the vehicle cost.
Yes. New cars are not exempt from the Consumer Rights Act, and the quality standard expected of them is higher. A dealer claiming a fault is “within manufacturer tolerance” does not override your right to reject if the car is not of satisfactory quality.
Your credit score should not be affected if you successfully have your agreement unwound. The finance is cancelled, and the payments are refunded, so in essence, you go back to where you started. If you miss payments before the claim is resolved, you may see your score take a hit.
Notify both. The dealer sold the car, but the finance company legally supplied it and shares responsibility. Your rejection must reach both the lender and dealer. Notifying just one can hinder your claim.
If the dealer or finance company refuses, rejection becomes a legal matter rather than a request. The next steps are the formal letter before action, escalation to the Motor Ombudsman or Financial Ombudsman, or a court claim. This is the stage at which we normally step in.
About Philip Harmer
Philip studied consumer finance during his master’s degree and led the Finance and Insurance division for Mercedes-Benz Retail Group. His deep understanding of compliance processes, combined with Stormcatcher’s FCA authorisation, allows him to advise on HP, PCP, and insurance mis-selling with authority. He has acted against most major finance providers and is known for securing strong outcomes in complex finance disputes.
He regularly advises on car finance complaints, finance-related vehicle defects, and ombudsman referrals.
Contact Stormcatcher for First Free Advice