Northridge Finance · DRN-6305795

The complaint Mr G complains that a car that was supplied to him under a hire purchase agreement with N.I.I.B. Group Limited, trading as Northridge Finance, wasn’t of satisfactory quality. What happened A used car was supplied to Mr G under a hire purchase agreement with Northridge Finance that he electronically signed in July 2025. The price of the car was £11,500, Mr G part- exchanged a car which was treated as an advance payment of £2,317, and he agreed to make 35 monthly payments of £307.73 and a final payment of £317.73 to Northridge Finance. The car broke down in October 2025 and Mr G complained to Northridge Finance and said that he wanted to reject it. The car was repaired and Northridge Finance said that it wasn’t able to support rejection. Mr G didn’t collect the car and referred his complaint to this service. His complaint was looked at by one of this service’s investigators who didn’t think that Mr G had the right to reject the car, but recommended that Northridge Finance should refund one monthly payment to Mr G for the period of time the car was off the road, with interest, and pay him £300 for any distress or inconvenience that’s been caused. Mr G went to collect the car in January 2026 and discovered that it was damaged with a snapped wing mirror and mechanism, snapped rear windscreen wiper and mechanism, a key scratch on the bonnet and a puncture. The investigator then said that Mr G should have the right to reject the car and he recommended that Northridge Finance should: end the finance agreement and take the car back; waive any potential damage fees; refund Mr G’s deposit contribution of £2,317 and his monthly repayments from 7 October 2025, all with interest; and pay him £300 for any distress or inconvenience that’s been caused. Having considered the further impact of the situation on Mr G, and having considered everything, the investigator then recommended that Northridge Finance should also pay him an additional £100 compensation. Mr G has accepted the investigator’s recommendation, but Northridge Finance doesn’t agree that rejection of the car is fair or reasonable in the circumstances, so it has requested that this complaint be referred to an ombudsman for a final decision. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. Northridge Finance, as the supplier of the car, was responsible for ensuring that it was of satisfactory quality when it was supplied to Mr G. Whether or not it was of satisfactory quality at that time will depend on a number of factors, including the age and mileage of the car and the price that was paid for it. The car that was supplied to Mr G was first registered in February 2021, so was more than four years old, the invoice shows that it had been driven

-- 1 of 3 --

for 63,841 miles and the price of the car was £11,500. Satisfactory quality also covers durability which means that the components within the car must be durable and last a reasonable amount of time, but exactly how long that time is will depend on a number of factors. There doesn’t seem to be any dispute that there was a fault with the car that caused it to breakdown in October 2025 and the dealer arranged for the car to be repaired. I consider that the fault with the car caused it not to have been of satisfactory quality when it was supplied to Mr G. I also consider that the repair of the car would have been a fair and reasonable response to the fault with it. Mr G had complained to Northridge Finance and said that he wanted to reject the car. It said that it wasn’t able to support rejection, so Mr G referred his complaint to this service. He didn’t collect the car as he wanted to reject it. The investigator didn’t think that Mr G had the right to reject the car and he said that Mr G should arrange to collect the car as soon as possible to avoid any enforcement action being taken. Mr G then went to collect the and discovered that it was damaged with a snapped wing mirror and mechanism, snapped rear windscreen wiper and mechanism, a key scratch on the bonnet and a puncture. He’s provided photos of the damage to the car. When Mr G went to collect the car, it wasn’t in an acceptable condition and required further repairs. As Mr G had said that he wanted to reject the car in October 2025 and, when he went to collect it in January 2026, it required further repairs, I consider that it would be fair and reasonable for him to now be able to reject the car. I’ve carefully considered all that Northridge Finance has said and provided about Mr G’s complaint, but in these circumstances I find that it would be fair and reasonable for it to take the actions described below to put things right. Putting things right I find that it would be fair and reasonable for Northridge Finance to end the hire purchase agreement and arrange for the car to be collected, both at no cost to Mr G, and it shouldn’t charge him for any damage to the car. The hire purchase agreement shows that Mr G made an advance payment of £2,317 for the car. I find that it would also be fair and reasonable for Northridge Finance to refund to Mr G that amount, with interest. Mr G says that he first reported a fault with the car on 7 October 2025 and he’s provided a breakdown report dated 9 October 2025. He says that he hasn’t been able to use the car and I find that it would be fair and reasonable for Northridge Finance to refund to Mr G the monthly payments that he’s made under the hire purchase agreement for the period since 7 October 2025, with interest. It can keep the payments that he made before then as payment for the use that he’s had from the car. The investigator has described the distress and inconvenience that Mr G has been caused. I agree with the investigator that it would also be fair and reasonable for Northridge Finance to pay him £400 to compensate him for that distress and inconvenience. My final decision My decision is that I uphold Mr G’s complaint and order N.I.I.B. Group Limited, trading as Northridge Finance, to: 1. End the hire purchase agreement and arrange for the car to be collected, both at no cost to Mr G and it shouldn’t charge him for any damage to the car.

-- 2 of 3 --

2. Refund to Mr G the advance payment of £2,317. 3. Refund to Mr G the monthly payments that he’s made under the hire purchase agreement for the period since 7 October 2025. 4. Pay interest on the amounts at 2 and 3 above at an annual rate of 8% simple from the date of each payment to the date of settlement. 5. Pay £400 to Mr G to compensate him for the distress and inconvenience that he’s been caused. HM Revenue & Customs requires Northridge Finance to deduct tax from the interest payment referred to above. Northridge Finance must give Mr G a certificate showing how much tax it’s deducted if he asks it for one. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr G to accept or reject my decision before 25 May 2026. Jarrod Hastings Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --