My four-year experience with a used car bought through Moneybarn — what I learned

wizgreg

I am posting this because someone reading it may be going through something similar right now. What I want to share is not advice. It is my experience and from the day I picked the car up to the day I stood in court four years later. If any part of it sounds familiar, I hope it helps you feel less alone. In October 2021, I bought a used car through a Conditional Sale Agreement with Moneybarn. I was a first-time buyer with them. The car was around seven years old at purchase, and I needed reliable transport. Two months later, in December 2021, my mother died. I did not know it at the time, but grief affects how you deal with things. You
accept things you might otherwise question. You keep going because stopping feels harder.

On the drive home from the dealer, the car pulled to one side. I noticed it immediately but told myself it might be the road, the weather (the rain fell heavily on that day), my imagination. I wanted the car to be fine.

Within days I was certain. The steering was not right.

Over the first few months, several issues emerged that I had not been told about at purchase.

The brakes and caliper. The braking felt uneven from the beginning. Within weeks I could hear grinding from one side. A garage confirmed the caliper needed replacing. The dealer offered me a used part off eBay to sort it. I refused and paid for a proper replacement at my own expense.

The steering veer. The pull to one side continued. Over time this was traced to worn suspension components including the wishbone.

Corrosion. Visible corrosion on parts of the underbody, and as later MOTs documented all four coil springs and the rear brake pipes. These were noted as MOT advisories from as early as September 2022, less than a year after purchase.

The clutch. The clutch felt heavier than it should. This became progressively harder to operate over time.

Rattling underneath. Ongoing noise ascribed later to worn anti-roll bar bushes and connected components.

The exhaust. Broken and requiring repair.

Individually, any one of these might have been treatable as wear and tear on a used vehicle. Together, they told me the car was not in the condition it should have been at the point of sale.

In April 2022, six months after purchase, I raised a formal complaint with Moneybarn about the vehicle's condition, my delay in making the complaint was due to having to deal with the death of my mother and the grief that came with it. This was my first formal engagement with them beyond the routine payments.

Their internal handling took time. In July 2022, they sent me a Final Response Letter. In that letter, they acknowledged in writing that there were "inherent or developing faults at the point of sale."

Those were their words. In their own formal letter, issued under the Financial Conduct Authority's complaint-handling rules. They admitted the vehicle had faults present when it was sold to me.

I thought this was significant. It felt like validation of what I had been experiencing since day one.

But nothing much changed after the letter. They closed the complaint. I kept the car. I kept paying. And I kept spending my own money on repairs whenever something new emerged.

For anyone reading this who is in a similar situation, these are the legal frameworks that apply to used car finance disputes in the UK. I am not a lawyer, but I learned to work with these during my case:

Consumer Rights Act 2015, section 9: Goods must be of satisfactory quality when sold. This applies to used cars too, taking into account age and price.

Consumer Rights Act 2015, section 19(14): If a fault appears within six months of purchase, the law presumes the fault was present at the point of sale. The burden is on the seller to prove otherwise. This is called the "reverse burden of proof."

Consumer Credit Act 1974, section 75: Where you buy through a finance agreement over a certain amount, the finance company shares liability with the dealer for any breach of contract or misrepresentation.

Consumer Credit Act 1974, section 86E: The finance company must send you a Notice of Sums in Arrears at prescribed intervals when your account is in arrears. If they fail to do this, no interest accrues on the arrears during the period of non-compliance, and the sum is not payable during that period. This is automatic and it does not depend on the court finding anything else.

Consumer Credit Act 1974, section 90: Protected goods provision. If you have paid more than one-third of the total price under a regulated Conditional Sale or Hire Purchase
Agreement, the finance company cannot repossess the vehicle without a court order. Doing so is a breach of statutory duty.

Consumer Credit Act 1974, section 92: Even with a court order, entry to premises to collect the vehicle requires specific court permission.

Consumer Credit Act 1974, sections 140A and 140B: The court has power to consider whether the relationship between the debtor and the creditor is unfair. This considers the terms of the agreement, how rights have been exercised, and any other conduct of the creditor. If the court finds the relationship unfair, it has wide powers under section 140B to grant relief, including reducing or discharging the sum payable and requiring correction of credit reference records.

These matter because they apply to every regulated consumer credit agreement, not just mine.

Between 2022 and 2025, I continued to use the vehicle out of necessity. I could not afford to replace it while still paying for it. Every MOT recorded advisories corrosion on multiple parts, wear on components, ongoing issues that were not classed as immediate failures but showed the vehicle was not in good condition.

I paid for repairs I could afford. I made temporary fixes where I could not afford the full solution. I avoided the motorway while taking back roads due to safety concerns. I drove the car carefully because I knew it was not right.

Following my mother's death in December 2021, I was classified as vulnerable on Moneybarn's records. That flag was there throughout the relationship. In 2022, they treated me with some accommodation and worked with me on a payment plan. Later, that accommodation disappeared.

By late 2024, I was falling behind on payments. The reason was simple as I could not keep paying for the car and paying for its repairs at the same time. Something had to give.

I raised the issue with Moneybarn. I asked for help. I explained the ongoing vehicle problems. The response I got in 2025 was very different from the response I had received in 2022. No payment plan was offered. No engagement with the ongoing vehicle issues. The complaint I raised was dismissed as time-barred. Instead, enforcement began.

In April 2025, Moneybarn wrote to me stating that agents would collect the vehicle. This came without any court process.

I knew enough at that point to write back and remind them that the vehicle was protected goods under section 90 of the Consumer Credit Act and could not be collected without a court order. Their approach then changed to court proceedings.

From April 2025 through August 2026, I represented myself in the court proceedings. Sixteen months. I did not have a lawyer. I could not afford one.

I engaged with every step. I filed a Defence. I filed a Counterclaim under sections 140A and 140B of the Consumer Credit Act. I requested my full records from Moneybarn through a Subject Access Request. What came back included their internal notes and documents about my account.

Those internal documents contained things that surprised me:

One: An admission letter dated April 2026 acknowledging that Moneybarn had failed to comply with section 86E of the Consumer Credit Act in my case.

Two: An internal document (referred to as a Bulk Note Script) suggesting the same section 86E remediation had been applied across multiple customer accounts as batch remediation. In other words, this was not just me and it appeared to be a systemic issue.

Three: An internal remediation note dated April 2026 recording that a default should have been reported to credit reference agencies at the time it originally arose but "didn't happen at the time," and that Moneybarn had "updated the credit reference agencies and backdated the default." In their formal Defence to Counterclaim, they asserted the opposite that credit reporting was accurate and in line with obligations.

Four: Vulnerable customer flag records showing the flag was live throughout the relationship, including in 2025 when their approach hardened.

I prepared a witness statement of 135 numbered paragraphs. I compiled an exhibit bundle of 54 tabbed documents. I filed a paginated bundle at the court myself, in person, well before the deadline.

The trial happened on a Tuesday morning at the end of August 2026. Three hours in the small claims track. I was in the courtroom for the first time in my life as a party to proceedings.

Moneybarn did not send a witness. They sent an external agent, someone hired to present the case that day. Their written witness statements went in, but no one attended to be questioned on them.

Something happened at the trial that I want to highlight for anyone in a similar situation.

Written witness statements from a party whose witness does not attend to give live evidence are hearsay. Under the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and the Civil Procedure Rules, the party relying on hearsay evidence should serve a Hearsay Notice explaining why the witness is not attending. This allows the other side to challenge the credibility of the evidence and make submissions about the weight the court should give it.

At the start of the trial, the judge specifically asked Moneybarn's agent whether a Hearsay Notice had been filed.

The answer, as far as I could tell, was that no formal Hearsay Notice had been served.

This should have been significant. Written witness statements from absent witnesses that have not been properly notified as hearsay evidence should carry reduced weight compared to live oral evidence that is tested through cross-examination.

But this is where it got difficult. The judge did not dismiss Moneybarn's written evidence. And then, in reaching his decision, he relied on that same untested written evidence to reject my case Moneybarn mentioned that I didn't contact them on the day I pick the car up and reported the issue of the car veering- the SAR didn't include that call - even though a search for my number could've included it. Therefore to the court, that call didn't exist. My live oral evidence, given under cross-examination, was not preferred.

That inconsistency declining to dismiss hearsay evidence but then relying on it to reject the party who was actually present and testifying was one of the most difficult aspects of the trial for me to process.

The Claimant's agent led with four points: MOT records, arrears, mileage (even though mileage here would be a result of having to take a longer journey due to the issues with the vehicle for safety reasons), and a previous decision from the Ombudsman that had not gone my way (The FOS relied on the 2025 compliant due to the expiration of the 2022 complaint).

I gave my evidence and was cross-examined on those four points. I responded to each as best I could.

The judge retired for about an hour. He came back and dismissed my case on all points. He ordered me to pay costs of £728. What struck me was what the judge did not mention in his
reasoning.

Did not mention the 2022 letter admitting "inherent or developing faults at the point of sale."

Did not mention the internal admission of the section 86E breach.

Did not mention the internal document suggesting the section 86E remediation had been applied across multiple accounts.

Did not mention the internal admission of the credit reference backdating.

Did not mention my vulnerable customer status.

Did not mention the differential treatment between 2022 and 2025.

Did not mention the reverse burden of proof under section 19(14) of the Consumer Rights Act.

The substantive documents I had spent months preparing were not part of the judgment's reasoning. The judge preferred Moneybarn's oral submissions and decided in one hour of deliberation on the four points their agent had led with.

I am processing the outcome. The sealed order has not yet arrived. Practical decisions about the vehicle and the costs will be made when it does.

Whatever I decide about next steps, I have accepted where I am. Life is win and loss. I would have accepted a win the same way I am accepting the loss.

I want to share some things that struck me, not as advice, but as reflections from someone who has just been through this.

Documenting everything mattered. Every email, every letter, every note from my records request. If I had not saved them, I would have had nothing to fight with.

The Subject Access Request was the single most valuable step. Moneybarn's own internal records revealed the admissions that formed the core of my case. Without the SAR, none of that would have been in evidence. If you are in a dispute with a finance company, submit a Subject Access Request. It is free and it is your legal right.

Preparation as a person without a lawyer is possible.Not easy. But possible. Moneybarn's team took my case seriously in the last few weeks before trial because the evidence made them.

A well-prepared case can still lose at trial.Preparation does not guarantee the outcome. What happens in the courtroom, on the day, in front of a specific judge, is unpredictable.

The reverse burden of proof under section 19(14) is powerful if it is applied. For any fault appearing within six months, the law presumes the fault was present at supply. But it depends on the court actually applying the presumption. Make sure you plead it clearly and refer to it explicitly in your evidence.

Hearsay evidence should be treated carefully. If the other side is relying on written witness statements without their witnesses attending, and no proper Hearsay Notice has been served, this is a point worth raising clearly. Whether it makes a difference depends on the specific judge and case, but it deserves to be raised.

Free legal help exists, use it earlier than I did.There are charities and services that help people who cannot afford lawyers. If you are in this situation, ask for their help early. I found them too late in my process.

Rights on paper are different from rights in practice.I had legal protections. I could not fully use them because I could not afford proper representation, expert witnesses, and appeals. If I had been wealthy, I would not have needed to fight, I would have replaced the car. The fight itself was a function of not having the resources to walk away, yet I was ordered to pay Moneybarn's legal fess - a cost that is a daily coffee budget for Moneybarn and a monthly household bill for me.

Throughout all of this, I approached each stage with a specific mindset. I did not focus on the worst case. I focused on what I could control. I prepared as if I would win. I engaged as if the process mattered. I aimed to present with dignity regardless of the outcome.

Negativity, I found, makes you lazy. It makes you disengage. It makes you accept defeat before it arrives. The opposite approach prepare thoroughly, believe the outcome is possible, engage fully is what carried me through 16 months of proceedings and to the trial itself.

I lost the case. But I did not lose myself in the case and that matters.

If you are reading this while facing a similar situation, wherever you are in your own process, know this: You are not alone in the fight. Many people have been through something like this. Some won. Many lost. What remains is not just the outcome but how you carried yourself through it.

Engage. Do not disengage.

Document everything.

Submit a Subject Access Request early.

Prepare thoroughly.

Ask for free legal help early.

Save every email, every letter, every note.

Understand the specific laws that apply to your situation, sections 9 and 19(14) of the Consumer Rights Act, sections 75, 86E, 90, 140A and 140B of the Consumer Credit Act. Look them up. Read them.

Decide in advance what outcome you can accept.

Understand that even a well-prepared case can lose.

Understand that dignity is yours to keep.

Whatever happens, you can walk out of it knowing that you fought properly, engaged with the process, and did not let the pressure change who you are.

That is what I hold onto now.

My mother raised a fighter. She also raised someone who knows the difference between fighting the right fight and fighting every fight.

I would have accepted the win. I am accepting the loss.

Both take the same kind of strength.

To anyone reading this and I wish you well. Whatever you are facing, whatever the outcome, hold onto yourself through it.

Update: Due to the comments below — I have not included most critical parts of the case due to legal and privacy reasons. This post was created to assist those in a similar circumstance and to create awareness in the different laws that can be used. This post isn’t for sympathy or to seek advice. The case when through four judges and only the last judge saw it different.

caprikid1

So in summary

A 7 year old car needed some replacement steering bushes and a brake calliper.

Most cars 7 years or older in the uk will have visual corrosion underneath and on the springs.

Not sure who advised you that you could win a case 3 years after buying a 7 year old car.

PTP123

A Moneybarn customer has nowhere else to go anyway so it was either them or get the bus

caprikid1

If you google the company you will see successful cases around affordability/ suitability of finance, that might be a more suitable route to get some recompense than your chosen route, if nothing else it costs them money with the FCA I believe. Unfortunately they won't be strangers to dealing with such claims.

born_again

 The car was around seven years old at purchase, and I needed reliable transport. 

7 years & reliable?

Moneybarn did not sell you the car, & there is no mention of any contact with dealer over the issues. Which should have been the 1st port of call (consumer rights act) in the 1st 30 days given the issue on the way home.

Many of the listed issues are to be expected on a 7 year old car & relate to wear & tear. Which should have shown up in previous MOT

1st mention of raising anything is 6 months later with moneybarn?

wizgreg

please see my updated section for the comments above

A_Geordie

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82118684#Comment_82118684

Moneybarn did sell the car to the OP, that's why it was a conditional sale agreement between the OP and Moneybarn otherwise the contractual paperwork would have been between the OP and the dealer and the majority of dealers do not have the necessary regulatory permissions to offer credit agreements like a conditional sale. It was correct that the OP contacted Moneybarn and not the dealer.

wizgreg

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82118684#Comment_82118684

To answer this: the first call to Moneybarn was on the first day (Moneybarn mentioned they can’t locate that call) and this was to report the veering. The second call on that day was to the dealer to request the petrol type - he mentioned the car was sitting for months. During November to December, leading up to formal complaint, the dealer sent a used caliper which no service providers would fit citing safety reasons. The dealer also proposed taking back the vehicle for a cost lower than what he sold it for which would mean I would still owe Moneybarn £8k. Moneybarn closed that complaint because “the dealer made things right”

PTP123

The second call was to request the petrol type?

wizgreg

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82119064#Comment_82119064

I don’t believe you are reading properly- noticed what I mentioned after that “the dealer mentioned that the car was sitting for months” which would suggest that wasn’t the only conversation. The comments above is a reflection of skimming for critic factors and not taking in account the reason the post is there. It should be noted that my post above doesn’t include much of the case and that is intentional. The post is carefully designed to only provide information on various steps that can be taken. My post doesn’t need a judge or jury to determine any alternative outcome. I stood up to a giant and it had impacted various factors regardless of the results. This medium is a place people visit for information when they can’t find any medium. I came here before this started and I saw these comments with no helping factors and that is why I am now sharing my experience- not for critics but for people who need help to navigate the issues they faced such as this one

lincroft1710

If you post on this forum, other posters may well comment favourably or adversely, or seek clarification of matters which are unclear or do not appear to make sense. That is the nature of the forum.