The Problem With Car Finance Car Rejection Complaints

The problem with the car finance company process for handling car rejection is that it is all too often opaque, incoherent, and unnecessarily lengthy. In the worse cases it can be entirely perverse.

Rather than analysing and applying the relevant facts and evidence to the law, it is apparent in too many instances finance companies do the reverse, ‘cherry picking’ the evidence it chooses to and then misinterpreting the law to obtain their preferred outcome, namely declining the rejection.

An unsophisticated five stage complaints procedure has been harnessed to this, which is set out below.

Background

There are primarily two parties to the contract for the sale of the car: you and the finance company.

The supplying dealer sells the vehicle to the finance company who in turn sells it to you by way of a form of hire purchase agreement.

As a rule, when a motor car supplied by a trader to a consumer has been misdescribed, misrepresented, mis-sold or is faulty, the buyer has the right to have the car bought into conformity to the contract (i.e. repaired) or to rescind the contract (reject the car) within 30 days of purchase or thereafter, if the Vehicle cannot be repaired or a previous repair has failed.

Recission of the contract- rejecting the car- brings the contract to an end and once communicated and evidenced to the trader, the trader has a duty to give the consumer a refund [ subject to subsection (18)] and the consumer has a duty to make the goods available for collection by the trader.

However, the car finance company process can often look at odds with the law.

Car complaints

The first stage is to set the scene: the finance company will try to manage your expectations, explaining, in accordance with the Financial Conduct Authority rules, it has up to 8 weeks to investigate and provide a final response to the complaint. As a justification for this and to distance itself from the problem, you might find the finance company say “you will appreciate, we have not ever seen the car but entirely relied on the dealer.”

This paves the way for the second stage, misdirection:  this is where the finance company brings the dealer into play, despite not being a party to a contract with you and allowing the finance company to take a sidestep out of the “firing line” and occupy the role of a “go-between” between you and the dealer.

‘Privity of contract’ means only the parties to a contract can enforce its terms. With this fundamental principal obscured, the seed is easily sown for stage three: misrepresentation: the proposition that it is the car dealership who must first accept the vehicle rejection and refund the finance company to enable it to refund you.

Stage four: to-ing and fro-ing between the dealership and the finance company, each denying liability and each directing you to the other, is exhausting and soul destroying, adding to the  inconvenience and stress of being without a vehicle. This way of weakening your resolve can be exacerbated by the finance company informing you upon the expiry of the 8 weeks “we are unable to provide you with a final response” and informing you of your right to escalate the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service where it may take another 6 months or more to receive a decision.

Stage five: at some point, it is likely you will be told either the evidence you supplied is inadequate to prove your case or further evidence is required. As a result, you’ll be told the finance company will commission and independent expert inspection of the Vehicle…. except it is not independent, as it is the finance company who will be instructing the expert. As a result of the large number of “expert” inspections carried out by the nominated firms, it can hardly be considered impartial, either.

For some customers who suggested the “expert” barely looked at the car at all, and others who claim the inspector didn’t drive it, it is of no surprise the resultant report concludes the problem is “wear and tear,” driver error’ or simply was not present or developing at the point of sale, leaving the buyer with nowhere to go.

The problem with car finance companies’ processes for handling the rejection of misdescribed, misrepresented, mis-sold or faulty vehicles is the inadequacy of knowledge, expertise and training in the core legal principals, the goods and dispute resolution.

If you have experienced any of the issues referred to in this article or want to reject a car, we can help you get back on track. Please call Stormcatcher Law, the automotive law experts on 0333 700 7676