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, who required regular treatment at the oncology department.

In February 2020, after driving around 27,000 miles, the Land Rover broke down and had to be recovered. The breakdown engineer reported that the engine had seized which would likely cost around £20,000 to replace.

Mr M complained to Santander, who having had the Land Rover inspected, concluded that the vehicle was not faulty nor had a latent defect when it was sold, and rejected the complaint.

Mr M instructed Stormcatcher Law, which specialises in car rejection cases and is renowned for its expertise in faulty land rover claims. Stormcatcher wrote to the finance company, who again declined the complaint in reliance upon the engine having been driven around 90,000 miles and, in their view, had simply reached the end of its natural life.

Stormcatcher questioned the logic and fairness of a motor finance company agreeing to a 5 year HP deal on a car which was by its own case unlikely to last beyond 3 years: no sensible answer was received.

As a result, the matter was escalated to the Financial Ombudsman Service, who initially didn’t uphold the complaint. In view of Mr M’s personal situation, the Financial Ombudsman fast-tracked the case, although it still took many months to conclude.

AGS Claims Consultants were instructed to carry out an expert engineer’s inspection report which concluded:

“the engine failure was due to crankshaft bearing failure due to oil starvation and inadequate lubrication caused by main bearing shell rotation and obstruction of the lubrication process of the main bearings”.

He considered this to be the same issue identified in the manufacturer’s service bulletin and that the engine failure was not due to normal wear and tear.

Santander were provided with a copy of the engineer’s report but believed the contents were uncorroborated and unsustainable and again rejected the complaint.

Absent any cogent defence to the claim, the matter was vehemently pursued, with great assistance from Midway Garage Limited for the use of its premises and their help, and Steve Lowing’s vehicle transport for transporting the vehicle to and from Midway.

The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) concluded in its final decision that it had carefully considered what Santander said after it had seen the report.

“It may have taken several years for the car to fail and the manufacturer didn’t consider the problem widespread or serious enough to recall the car.

But that doesn’t make a difference to my conclusion – the car had a fault when it was manufactured which meant it wasn’t of satisfactory quality when it was supplied to Mr M. I wouldn’t expect this fault to have been identified during an MOT or service as it required the engine to be dismantled to find it. And the fact that the supplying garage may not have known that the car wasn’t of satisfactory quality does not make a difference – it, and – through the finance agreement – Santander is responsible for supplying an unsatisfactory quality car to Mr M”

Santander were ordered to cancel the agreement with nothing further for Mr M to pay and refund any deposit, plus 8% simple interest from the date of payment to the date of settlement. Mr M was awarded £300 for the trouble and upset caused.

Mr M expressed his gratitude to Stormcatcher Law for their advice, expertise and determination in eventually bringing the matter to a conclusion, in successfully securing a rejection of the Land Rover and having the finance agreement unwound.

Stormcatcher law are automotive law experts, regulated and authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority to bring claims of faulty cars bought on finance.