How to respond to customer complaints under CRA 2015:

Understanding your obligations when a customer complains

When a customer raises a complaint about a vehicle purchased from your dealership, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 places specific obligations on you to respond promptly and appropriately. Your primary duty is to investigate the complaint thoroughly, provide a substantive response within a reasonable timeframe (typically 14 days), and either remedy the fault, offer a repair, or justify why the complaint lacks merit. The Act requires you to act in good faith and provide evidence that either the vehicle was satisfactory at the point of sale or that any defect arose after delivery through misuse or normal wear. Failing to respond properly can escalate a manageable complaint into a formal rejection claim or legal action.

The stakes are high. A poorly handled complaint can result in a full refund, loss of the vehicle, damage to your reputation, and potential involvement of Trading Standards. Conversely, a well-documented, evidence-based response can resolve disputes quickly, maintain customer relationships, and protect your business from unwarranted claims.

The critical first 30 days: short-term rejection rights

The first 30 days after sale represent your highest-risk period. During this window, customers have the right to reject a vehicle and claim a full refund if it fails to meet the CRA 2015 standards of being of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, or as described. Crucially, the burden of proof sits heavily on your shoulders from day one. If a fault appears within the first six months, the law presumes it was present at the point of sale unless you can prove otherwise.

When a complaint arrives during this period, your response must be immediate. Acknowledge receipt within 24 hours, even if you need time to investigate. Request the customer bring the vehicle in for inspection or arrange for an independent assessment. Document everything: the customer's description of the fault, when it first appeared, how the vehicle has been used, and any relevant mileage or service history since purchase.

The rejection rights in the first 30 days are absolute if the vehicle is faulty, so your investigation must be thorough and swift. Gather evidence from your pre-sale inspection, any PDI report, provenance checks, and manufacturer service history. If the fault genuinely arose after sale, you need contemporaneous evidence to demonstrate this.

Building your evidence file: what you need to defend your position

A robust response to any CRA 2015 complaint rests on evidence, not opinion. Your evidence file should include your pre-delivery inspection report, the vehicle provenance check showing its history at point of sale, photographs of the vehicle's condition, any disclosure documents provided to the customer, and records of how the vehicle was described in your advertisement.

Manufacturer service history is particularly valuable. If a customer claims a fault that contradicts the vehicle's verified service records, you have strong grounds to challenge the complaint. For example, if digital service records show recent dealer inspections with no advisories for a component the customer now claims was defective at sale, that timeline matters. Similarly, MOT history showing recent passes with no relevant advisories can support your position.

Factory build data also plays a role when complaints involve mis-description. If a customer claims you mis-sold optional equipment, OEM build sheets provide definitive proof of what was actually fitted at manufacture. This evidence is incontrovertible and can quickly resolve disputes over specifications.

Your evidence file should also include any correspondence with the customer, records of how they reported the fault, and details of their usage since purchase. If a customer has covered significant mileage or the fault only appeared after specific usage patterns, this context is relevant to whether the vehicle was faulty at the point of sale.

Structuring your written response

Your written response must be clear, professional, and evidence-based. Begin by acknowledging the complaint and expressing your commitment to resolving it fairly. Summarise the customer's concerns to demonstrate you have understood them correctly. Then present your findings from the investigation, supported by specific evidence.

If you accept the complaint has merit, state clearly what remedy you are offering: repair, replacement, or refund. Explain the timeline for the remedy and any conditions. If you are offering a repair, specify what will be done, who will do it, and how long it will take. Under CRA 2015, repairs must be completed within a reasonable time without significant inconvenience to the customer.

If you dispute the complaint, explain why with reference to the evidence. For example: "Our pre-delivery inspection on [date] found no issues with the clutch, and the vehicle had covered only 340 miles at that point. The MOT conducted three weeks before sale showed no advisories related to the clutch. The fault you have reported appeared after you had covered 1,200 miles in six weeks, including a holiday to Scotland. Our independent inspection indicates the clutch has failed due to wear consistent with heavy use rather than a pre-existing defect."

Avoid vague language or dismissive tone. Phrases like "we believe" or "in our opinion" weaken your position. Instead, use evidence-based language: "The service history shows," "The independent inspection found," "The MOT record indicates."

Close by inviting further discussion if the customer remains dissatisfied, and provide details of any alternative dispute resolution schemes you belong to. This demonstrates good faith and can prevent escalation.

The burden of proof: who must prove what and when

Understanding the burden of proof under CRA 2015 is essential for structuring your response. For the first six months after sale, if a fault appears, the law presumes it existed at the point of sale. The burden is on you to prove it did not. This is a high bar. You must show, on the balance of probabilities, that the fault arose after delivery through misuse, accident, or normal wear and tear.

After six months, the burden shifts to the customer. They must prove the fault existed at the point of sale. However, you still have a duty to investigate and respond in good faith. Even if the burden has shifted, a well-evidenced response protects your reputation and can prevent disputes escalating.

In practice, this means your response strategy differs depending on timing. In the first six months, your response must proactively demonstrate why the fault could not have been present at sale. After six months, you can place more emphasis on the customer providing evidence that the fault pre-dated delivery.

Offering remedies: repair, replacement, or refund

When a complaint is valid, you must offer an appropriate remedy. The CRA 2015 establishes a hierarchy: the customer is generally entitled to a repair or replacement first, with a refund available if repair is impossible, disproportionately expensive, or cannot be completed within a reasonable time.

If offering a repair, be specific about what will be done, where, and when. The repair must be completed within a reasonable time (typically interpreted as days or a few weeks, not months) and without significant inconvenience to the customer. If the repair requires the customer to be without the vehicle for an extended period, consider offering a courtesy car.

If the same fault recurs after repair, or if multiple attempts to fix it fail, the customer's right to reject strengthens significantly. At that point, offering a replacement vehicle or refund becomes necessary. Handling disputes over vehicle condition requires pragmatism: sometimes accepting a return is more cost-effective than prolonged dispute.

Refunds after the first 30 days can include a deduction for use. The law allows you to make a reasonable deduction to reflect the benefit the customer has had from the vehicle. This is typically calculated based on mileage and time, but must be fair. Excessive deductions can themselves become a point of dispute.

When to involve independent inspection

Independent inspections are valuable when there is genuine disagreement about whether a fault existed at sale or arose afterwards. If a customer claims a significant defect and you dispute it, suggest an independent assessment by a qualified technician or engineer who is not connected to either party.

Agree in advance who will pay for the inspection and whether both parties will accept its findings as binding. In many cases, offering to cover the inspection cost if it finds in the customer's favour, while asking the customer to pay if it supports your position, is a fair compromise.

Independent inspections are particularly useful for mechanical faults where causation is disputed. An expert can often determine whether a component failed due to a pre-existing defect, poor maintenance, or misuse. This evidence carries significant weight if the dispute escalates to court or alternative dispute resolution.

Documenting everything: creating an audit trail

Every interaction with a complaining customer should be documented. Keep records of phone calls (noting date, time, and content), emails, text messages, and in-person conversations. If you inspect the vehicle, take photographs and detailed notes. If you commission reports or inspections, retain copies.

This audit trail serves multiple purposes. It demonstrates you have taken the complaint seriously and investigated thoroughly. It provides evidence if the customer later misrepresents what was said or agreed. And it protects you if the dispute escalates to Trading Standards, an ombudsman, or court.

Your documentation should be factual and professional. Avoid emotional language or personal comments about the customer. Stick to observable facts: what was said, what was found, what evidence exists.

Common complaint scenarios and how to respond

Certain complaints recur frequently in the motor trade. A customer claims a mechanical fault that your pre-sale checks did not identify. Your response should reference your inspection process, any provenance data showing the vehicle's history, and evidence about when and how the fault manifested. If the fault appeared after significant use, highlight this.

A customer alleges the vehicle was mis-described, claiming features or specifications that differ from what was advertised. Factory build data is your strongest defence here. OEM build sheets definitively prove what equipment was fitted at manufacture. If your description matched the build sheet, you have a complete defence.

A customer reports a fault that was disclosed at sale, either verbally or in writing. Your response should reference the disclosure, provide evidence it was made clear, and explain that disclosed faults do not breach CRA 2015 because the customer bought with knowledge of them.

A customer claims a fault that is actually normal operation or characteristic of the vehicle model. For example, certain diesel particulate filter regeneration cycles or dual-mass flywheel characteristics can be misinterpreted as faults. Your response should explain the feature, provide manufacturer documentation if available, and offer to demonstrate it is operating as designed.

Escalation and alternative dispute resolution

If your response does not satisfy the customer, they may escalate the complaint. This could involve Trading Standards, an ombudsman scheme (if you are a member), or legal action. Your initial response is critical because it will be reviewed by any third party assessing the dispute.

A well-structured, evidence-based response demonstrates you have acted reasonably and in good faith. Even if the ultimate decision goes against you, showing you investigated properly and offered reasonable remedies can limit any additional penalties or reputational damage.

Many motor trade associations offer alternative dispute resolution schemes. If you belong to one, inform the customer of this option in your response. ADR is typically faster and cheaper than court action for both parties, and demonstrating willingness to use it shows good faith.

Using compliance tools to strengthen your position

Proper documentation at the point of sale significantly strengthens your position when responding to complaints. Pre-delivery inspection reports, distance sale packs, and comprehensive provenance checks create a paper trail that demonstrates the vehicle's condition and your transparency.

If you conducted a thorough vehicle check before sale, including finance verification, mileage validation, and service history retrieval, you can reference this in your response. It shows you took reasonable steps to ensure the vehicle's provenance and condition, which is relevant to whether you acted in good faith.

Digital service history is particularly powerful because it is independently verifiable. If a customer claims a fault that contradicts verified manufacturer service records, you have objective evidence to challenge the claim. Similarly, if MOT history shows the vehicle passed inspection shortly before sale with no relevant advisories, this supports your position that any fault arose after delivery.

Timeframes and response deadlines

While CRA 2015 does not specify an exact deadline for responding to complaints, the concept of "reasonable time" runs throughout the Act. In practice, you should acknowledge a complaint within 24 hours and provide a substantive response within 14 days. If investigation requires longer (for example, waiting for an independent inspection), communicate this to the customer with a clear timeline.

Delayed responses damage your position. They suggest you are not taking the complaint seriously, and they give the customer grounds to claim you are acting in bad faith. Even if you need time to gather evidence, regular communication maintains trust and demonstrates your commitment to resolution.

Remember that understanding the rejection rights timeline is essential. The first 30 days, the first six months, and the period beyond six months each have different rules about burden of proof and available remedies. Your response must reflect which period applies.

Preventing complaints through better sales processes

The best response to a complaint is preventing it in the first place. Accurate vehicle descriptions, thorough pre-sale inspections, transparent disclosure of any known issues, and proper documentation all reduce complaint risk.

When you provide customers with comprehensive information about a vehicle's history, service records, and specifications at the point of sale, you set accurate expectations. Customers who know exactly what they are buying are far less likely to complain later.

Similarly, when you document the vehicle's condition thoroughly before sale, you create evidence that protects you if a complaint arises. A detailed PDI report with photographs is far more persuasive than a verbal claim that you checked the vehicle.

FAQ

How quickly must I respond to a customer complaint under CRA 2015?

While the Act does not specify an exact deadline, you should acknowledge complaints within 24 hours and provide a substantive response within 14 days. If your investigation requires longer (for example, arranging an independent inspection), communicate this clearly to the customer with a realistic timeline. Delayed responses can be interpreted as acting in bad faith and may strengthen the customer's position if the dispute escalates.

Can I refuse to accept a return if the customer has driven significant mileage since purchase?

Mileage alone does not eliminate a customer's rights, but it is relevant context. If a fault appears after substantial use, you can argue it arose through wear and tear rather than being present at sale. However, during the first six months, the burden is on you to prove this. After six months, the customer must prove the fault existed at sale. If you do accept a return after the first 30 days, you can make a reasonable deduction from the refund to reflect the use the customer has had from the vehicle.

What evidence do I need to prove a fault was not present at the point of sale?

You need contemporaneous evidence from the point of sale: pre-delivery inspection reports, provenance checks showing the vehicle's history, MOT records from shortly before sale, manufacturer service history, and photographs of the vehicle's condition. If the fault appeared after specific usage or incidents, evidence of this (such as the customer's own description of when the problem started) is also relevant. Independent inspection reports can provide expert opinion on whether a fault is consistent with a pre-existing defect or subsequent wear and misuse.

Should I offer a repair or a refund when a customer complains?

In the first 30 days, if the complaint is valid, the customer has the right to reject and receive a full refund. After 30 days, you can offer a repair first, provided it can be completed within a reasonable time without significant inconvenience. If repair is impossible, disproportionately expensive, or fails to fix the problem, the customer's right to a refund or replacement strengthens. Your response should reflect the specific circumstances and the timeline since sale.

What should I do if a customer's complaint contradicts the vehicle's verified service history?

Highlight this discrepancy clearly in your response, providing specific evidence from the service records. For example, if digital manufacturer records show a recent dealer inspection with no advisories for the component the customer claims was faulty, state this explicitly with dates and details. Verified service history from manufacturer databases is objective evidence that carries significant weight. However, remain professional and avoid accusing the customer of dishonesty; simply present the facts and explain why they suggest the fault arose after sale.