Two examples of how the Motor Ombudsman works
Case study 1
MR K bought a second-hand Nissan Qashqai from a dealership, and was told it had a full service history. But after the sale, the dealer could only provide documentation for three out of four services – although staff said he had been able to see the complete set when he placed the order.
The dealer offered two years’ free servicing and also said it would take the car back, but Mr K was happy with the Qashqai apart from its missing service, so sought some compensation. While a Motor Ombudsman adjudicator initially ruled in the dealer’s favour, Mr K appealed.
Natasha felt the dealer’s offers were fair, but ruled in Mr K’s favour, because she felt he was financially disadvantaged – partly as the car would be worth more with a full service history. After gauging the value of a full history on a Qashqai, Natasha advised the dealer should pay Mr K £750.
Case study 2
MR D took his car for an MOT and asked the garage to investigate its broken heater. While staff fixed the heater and the car passed its MOT, Mr D then received a call to say the car’s engine had seized.
He was told it was due to poor care; the oil was thick, the air filter was dirty and the car had a defective cylinder. Mr D believed the garage had caused the issues and carried out a technical report. It contested the garage’s claim, but found the car hadn’t been serviced in six years. Mr D contacted the Motor Ombudsman. The garage offered a goodwill gesture, but didn’t accept it had caused the underlying issues with the car.
While the adjudicator felt the garage’s contact with Mr D could have been better, it didn’t uphold the complaint. Mr D rejected this outcome, so the case went to Gasson. She felt the technical report cast some doubts on the garage’s claim the engine was seized, but she also ruled in its favour. reached. She tells us this helps her have a “sense check”, keeping her decision-making skills fresh and fair. The Chartered Trading Standards Institute also regulates the Motor Ombudsman as an organisation, auditing the company once a year to ensure it acts with impartiality.
To keep up with a changing consumer landscape, the Motor Ombudsman is also looking to change the way it works. It will bring more subtle nuances than the current ‘upheld’ or ‘not upheld’ categories, with a ‘partially upheld’ judgement being among the changes. A new “goodwill recommendation” category will also be introduced, meaning businesses will be advised, but not compelled to, contribute to any accrued consumer costs.
And as for consumers, could members of the public do anything more to help protect themselves from potential issues? “The dealer has to bear the burden of responsibility,” Gasson says, adding: “But consumers need to feel comfortable they understand what they are agreeing to when they sign something.”
Buyers should also be aware that “just because a car has an individual fault, it doesn’t mean it is defective within the eyes of the law”. She cites one instance where a consumer complained about the radio buttons on their five-year-old car delaminating. This, Gasson says, would arguably constitute a fault, rather than a defect.
Among all those finely balanced judgements and frustrated consumers, empathy is an important skill for Ombudsman staff. “When a customer service adviser takes a call, often the first thing they need to do is just listen to the caller,” Gasson tells us.
But if empathy is important, objectivity is vital: “You get a feel for people and can have a gut instinct,” Gasson explains, “but it’s the facts that ultimately determine the outcome. You really have to ask the right questions to get to the bottom of a case.”