Motor Ombudsman - worthwhile?

tain

I've got a dispute with a garage over my car, which doesn't look like getting resolved. They are a member of the motor ombudsman, but the Trust Pilot reviews are terrible (e.g. them taking 18 months to 3 years to resolve anything, not just the sour people unhappy with the outcome).

Is there much point in using the ombudsman, or can I just go straight to a small claims court? Would a court look at me unfavourably for not trying the ombudsman first? 

dogshome

When it goes to court, have print-outs of the T/Pilot reviews handy just in case

Sandtree

I got into an argument with Mercedes as all 4 of our alloys were delaminating from the center but Mercedes refused to deal with it as a warranty issue because of kerb damage to the outer edges (far away from the delam). I had accepted their argument of betterment and so suggested I paid the £200 or so it'd cost for the edges to be fixed and Mercedes then deal with the warranty issue but they refused.

I found the Motor Ombudsman to be exceptionally helpful, in exceptionally short order after submitting  my complaint to them I got a response back saying Mercedes would be contacting me and the same day the dealership called to arrange for the car to come in and all four alloys be changed free of charge.

Over the years I've dealt with the Financial Ombudsman many times (on both sides of the complaint), Parliamentary & Health Ombudsman, Furniture Ombudsman and Motor. Of them all the Motor was the best experience. However not all ombudsman are equal and some have no powers to enforce their decision... the FOS rulings are binding on the financial institute, as I found out from a previous complaint a GP surgery can simply ignore the ruling of the PHOS 

fred246

If you look at the address of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and traders it's the same as the Motoring Ombudsman. The manufacturers fund the ombudsman. I have a feeling they are there to stop you going straight to court. It's a free service so you have nothing to lose except time and you can still go to court afterwards. I just wouldn't expect them to be impartial.

ris2015

I took a complaint to the Motor Ombudsman back in November 2018. I thought it was a straightforward case of poor service by a garage who also failed to follow their own complaints procedure.
I finally got a resolution from the Motor Ombudsman this month (January 2021).

ontheroad1970

fred246 said:

If you look at the address of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and traders it's the same as the Motoring Ombudsman. The manufacturers fund the ombudsman. I have a feeling they are there to stop you going straight to court. It's a free service so you have nothing to lose except time and you can still go to court afterwards. I just wouldn't expect them to be impartial.

Did you bother to read Sandtree's comment before putting up your latest diatribe?  

Polfers

I know this is an old thread, but: ontheroad1970 - you seem very dismissive of fred246's point calling his comments a diatribe. All I'd say, is one swallow does not a summer make.

I have just today spoken with the Motor Ombudsman, and frankly, it was like trying to plat fog. Example:

I am looking to buy an Approved used car. Said car - a 2016 model with 46K on the clock and a full service history - seems fine, but the make and model has a recognised engine design fault that if not amended, will likely result in a minimum repair bill of around £2,300 to replace the timing chain and allied components, and at worst, would destroy the engine, which would be more than the car's worth to fix.

Now, approved used cars are meant to be a higher standard of used car, in that they have multipoint checks on all important mechanical, electrical and chassis/suspension/brakes to ensure all are in good condition before sale, and you get a minimum 12 month warranty which is promoted by the manufacturer. However, the first exclusion as to "what isn't covered" in the warranty, is "Any defect which is likely to have existed before the warranty period" (this is under a "Spoticar" warranty, which is from a Peugeot Citroen main agent - car is a Vauxhall which is now owned by Stellantis, which owns all three manufacturers).

If there is this so called multi-point inspection, surely that should mean any points needing attention are fixed to a given standard before sale, because otherwise, given this one clause alone, what's the warranty actually worth?

I put this to the ombudsman, as I was looking to buy this particular vehicle, and asked what were the minimum standards to which these approved used car multi-point checks were held, as surely, they must need a yardstick by which to judge and arbitrate any complaint made in this regard should one occur (the dealership concerned were giving me the run-around on seeing a copy of the inspection report). Their answer? There isn't any such yardstick. I would have to go to the trading standards people... It's a case of the industry policing itself.

Warranty claims from new by the manufacturer may be one thing, but approved used cars? Not so sure they are any different from any other used car you might buy in terms of protection. I'd love to be proven wrong.