Effective from 5 September 2026. Issued by Zuno Group Ltd.

Referenced by the Zuno Operative Agreement at 2.2(g), 17.1, 17.4 and 25.4.

1. WHAT THIS POLICY IS

This Policy sets out worked examples of how the tests at clause 17.2 of the Zuno Operative Agreement apply to situations that come up in practice.

The examples are illustrative and not exhaustive. A situation not covered by an example is decided by the tests at 17.2 in exactly the same way as one that is.

This Policy does not create a rule. Every entry below is an application of a test that already sits in the agreement. Nothing here can produce an outcome the tests at 17.2 cannot reach, and nothing here changes what those tests say.

Adding or amending an entry is not a change to the agreement, provided the tests at 17.2 are unchanged. That is agreement clause 25.4.

Both the Operative and the customer are shown the same entry with the same outcome, so that neither is told a different answer to the same facts.

2. HOW AN ENTRY WORKS

Every entry names four things.

• The situation. The cause, stated as a cause rather than a story.
• The test. Which limb of 17.2 decides it.
• The outcome. Which of the five outcomes at 17.3 follows.
• The evidence. What has to be submitted for the test to be applied.

Entries are grouped by the test that decides them, not by how common they are.

3. THE TESTS, IN SUMMARY

This is a summary for reading convenience. The tests themselves are at clause 17.2 of the Zuno Operative Agreement and they govern. Where this summary and 17.2 differ, 17.2 is right.

Clause 17.2 governs as between Zuno and the Operative; a customer's own entitlement is set out in the Zuno Refund and Cancellation Policy.

• 17.2(a) Vehicle condition. A vehicle unsuitable for the booked service is refunded in full, unless it was presented in a condition, or is of a type, that the customer could not reasonably have been unaware was unsuitable, in which case there is no refund for that vehicle and the Operative is paid in full for it.
• 17.2(b) Access and conditions. Where a condition the customer confirmed at booking was not met on arrival, there is no refund and the Operative is paid in full for the affected vehicle, whatever the reason the condition was not met. Evidence reasonably available must be submitted. Where that evidence does not establish that the condition was not met, the outcome falls to 17.2(c) or 17.2(d), or, where every deliverable was produced, there is no refund and the Operative is paid in full for that vehicle.
• 17.2(c) Partial completion. Where some but not all of the deliverables were produced, the customer is refunded in proportion to those not produced and the Operative is paid the balance. A deliverable not produced because a 17.2(b) condition was not met is treated as produced for that calculation.
• 17.2(d) Non-completion. Where the Operative attended and no deliverable was produced, and neither 17.2(a) nor 17.2(b) applies, the customer is refunded in full for that vehicle and no payment is made to the Operative.

Each test is applied to each vehicle separately, and the sums held are allocated according to the price of each vehicle. That is agreement clause 17.1.

4. THE OUTCOMES, IN SUMMARY

The five outcomes at agreement clause 17.3 are the complete set of ways money can move on a review.

17.3(d) is not reached by any test. It is 17.3(a) with Zuno choosing to pay the Operative from its own funds in addition. It is exceptional, it is never adverse to the Operative, and it creates no obligation to reach the same outcome in another case. That is agreement clause 17.6. No entry in this Policy routes to it.

5. HOW PROPORTION IS MEASURED UNDER 17.2(c)

A proportional refund is measured against the deliverables for that service, as set out in the Zuno Operative Guide, which is a contract document under agreement clause 3.5. Each deliverable counts equally. A deliverable not produced because a 17.2(b) condition was not met is treated as produced.

The Guide publishes the deliverables for every service, so the arithmetic can be checked by either side.

6. EVIDENCE

Where an entry below names evidence, it is submitted through the platform at the time, not afterwards. A submission carries a reason, a written note, and at least one photograph.

Evidence is assessed on what it establishes, not on whether it was submitted. A submission that does not show what it is offered to show does not satisfy 17.2(b), and the outcome then falls to 17.2(c) or 17.2(d) as that clause directs.

The Operative's own condition photographs under agreement clause 19.2 are taken before work starts, are kept by the Operative, and are not uploaded. They are the Operative's evidence and may be provided on request.

7. THE WORKED EXAMPLES

7.1 Access and conditions

These are situations where a condition the customer confirmed at booking was not met on arrival. The test does not ask why the condition was not met. A condition outside the customer's control has the same outcome as one within it.

Entry 1. No usable water supply.

Situation. The customer confirmed at booking that a water supply meeting the condition in the Zuno customer Terms would be available. On arrival there is no supply, or the supply does not meet that condition.

Test. 17.2(b).

Outcome. 17.3(c). No refund for the affected vehicle. The Operative is paid in full for it.

Evidence. A photograph of the supply point or of its absence, and a note describing what was found.

Note. The water condition is defined in the Zuno customer Terms. This Policy does not restate it, so that the two documents cannot drift apart.

Entry 2. No usable power supply.

Situation. The customer confirmed at booking that a power supply would be available. On arrival there is none, or it cannot be used. Deliverables that depend on power cannot be produced.

Test. 17.2(b).

Outcome. 17.3(c). No refund for the affected vehicle. The Operative is paid in full for it, including for deliverables that could not be produced because the power was not available.

Evidence. A photograph of the supply point or of its absence, and a note describing what was found.

Note. This is the case 17.2(c)'s final sentence exists for. Where a Whole service loses its interior group to a power failure and the exterior group is produced, the blocked deliverables are treated as produced and the payment is in full. There is no proportional refund.

Entry 3. The location or the vehicle cannot be reached.

Situation. The customer confirmed at booking that the location would be accessible and that the vehicle would be positioned as the Zuno customer Terms require. On arrival the location cannot be reached, for example because of a locked gate, a barrier or a parking restriction, or the vehicle does not have the clear space around it that the Terms require, and it cannot be repositioned.

Test. 17.2(b).

Outcome. 17.3(c). No refund for the affected vehicle. The Operative is paid in full for it.

Evidence. A photograph showing what prevents access or what is obstructing the vehicle, and a note.

Note. Where access is granted on arrival, or the vehicle can be repositioned and is repositioned, the condition is met and there is nothing to review.

Entry 4. The vehicle is not there.

Situation. The customer confirmed the vehicle would be available at the booked location at the booked time. On arrival it is not present.

Test. 17.2(b).

Outcome. 17.3(c). No refund for that vehicle. The Operative is paid in full for it.

Evidence. A photograph of the location showing the vehicle is not there, and a note. Where a booking covers several vehicles and one is missing, the test is applied to that vehicle alone and the others are unaffected.

Entry 5. Nobody available and the vehicle cannot be accessed.

Situation. The customer confirmed at booking that they would be contactable and would grant access to the vehicle. On arrival nobody is available, the vehicle is locked or otherwise inaccessible, and the work cannot begin.

Test. 17.2(b).

Outcome. 17.3(c). No refund for the affected vehicle. The Operative is paid in full for it.

Evidence. A photograph of the location and of the vehicle as found, and a note recording the time of arrival and what was attempted.

Note. Zuno does not give the Operative the customer's contact details, for the reasons at agreement clause 12.2. The evidence reasonably available to an Operative in this situation is therefore the photograph and the note, and that is what the test is applied to.

7.2 Vehicle condition

These are situations where the vehicle itself is unsuitable for the service that was booked. The question is about the vehicle, not about the Operative.

Entry 6. The vehicle is more heavily soiled than the booked service covers.

Situation. The vehicle's condition is beyond what the booked service is specified to produce a finished result from.

Test. 17.2(a).

Outcome. 17.3(a) where the customer could not reasonably have known. The vehicle is refunded in full and no payment is made for it. 17.3(c) where the vehicle was presented in a condition the customer could not reasonably have been unaware was unsuitable. No refund for that vehicle and the Operative is paid in full for it.

Evidence. Photographs of the condition as found, and a note describing why it is beyond the booked service.

Note. The second branch is the ordinary case where the condition is plainly visible and long-standing. The first is the case where it is not, for example soiling under a cover or in a part of the vehicle the customer does not use.

Entry 7. Contamination or a biohazard.

Situation. The vehicle contains a substance that cannot be handled safely under the booked service, or that would require specialist treatment.

Test. 17.2(a).

Outcome. 17.3(a) where the customer could not reasonably have known. 17.3(c) where they could not reasonably have been unaware.

Evidence. Photographs sufficient to show the nature and extent of the contamination, and a note.

Note. Nothing in this Policy requires an Operative to work in conditions that are unsafe. Agreement clause 26.2 requires a risk assessment before work begins at each location.

Entry 8. The vehicle presented is not the vehicle booked.

Situation. The registration of the vehicle at the location does not match the registration booked.

Test. 17.2(a).

Outcome. 17.3(a) where the vehicle is unsuitable for the booked service and the customer could not reasonably have known. 17.3(c) where the vehicle is unsuitable and that was obvious to the customer or known to them.

Evidence. A photograph showing the vehicle and its registration, and a note recording the registration that was booked.

Note. A registration that does not match is not by itself an outcome. The test is whether the vehicle presented is unsuitable for the booked service. Where it is suitable and the Operative produces the deliverables, there is no review under this section. How a vehicle is sized is Zuno's assessment, not the customer's, and is never decided under 17.2.

Entry 9. Damage or a defect that makes the service unsafe to carry out.

Situation. The vehicle has damage or a defect that means the booked service cannot be produced without risk of making it worse, for example loose trim, failed seals, or existing paint damage.

Test. 17.2(a).

Outcome. 17.3(a) where the customer could not reasonably have known. 17.3(c) where they could not reasonably have been unaware.

Evidence. Photographs of the damage or defect, and a note recording why the service cannot safely be produced.

Note. This entry decides the money for the booking. It does not decide any claim that the Operative caused damage, which is agreement section 18 and is a matter between the customer and the Operative.

Entry 10. The vehicle is of a type Zuno does not service.

Situation. The vehicle is outside the range of vehicles the booked service covers, for example a commercial vehicle where the service is scoped to passenger cars.

Test. 17.2(a).

Outcome. 17.3(c) in the ordinary case. A vehicle's type is a fact its owner knows, so it will almost always be one the customer could not reasonably have been unaware of. No refund for that vehicle and the Operative is paid in full for it. 17.3(a) only where the vehicle's type was genuinely not apparent to the customer.

Evidence. A photograph showing the vehicle, and a note recording why it is outside the booked service.

Note. This turns on the vehicle's type, not its state. A passenger car used for business is not a vehicle of a type outside the service.

7.3 Partial completion

Entry 11. Some deliverables were not produced and no condition failed.

Situation. The vehicle was suitable, every condition the customer confirmed was met, and part of the booked service was produced.

Test. 17.2(c).

Outcome. 17.3(b). The customer is refunded in proportion to the deliverables not produced, each counting equally, as set out in the Zuno Operative Guide. The Operative is paid the balance.

Evidence. The completion photographs required by agreement clause 19.1, which show what was produced.

Entry 12. A condition failed and other deliverables were also not produced.

Situation. A condition the customer confirmed was not met, which blocked some deliverables, and other deliverables that did not depend on that condition were also not produced.

Test. 17.2(b) for the blocked deliverables, then 17.2(c) for the remainder.

Outcome. 17.3(b). The blocked deliverables are treated as produced. The customer is refunded in proportion to the deliverables that were neither produced nor blocked, and the Operative is paid the balance.

Evidence. The evidence for the condition failure, plus the completion photographs for what was produced.

Note. This is the only entry where two tests are applied to one vehicle. They are applied in order, and the second is applied to what the first leaves.

7.4 Non-completion

Entry 13. Nothing was produced and no test in 17.2(a) or 17.2(b) applies.

Situation. The Operative attended, no deliverable for the booked service was produced, the vehicle was suitable, and every condition the customer confirmed was met.

Test. 17.2(d).

Outcome. 17.3(a). The customer is refunded in full for that vehicle and no payment is made for it.

Evidence. None is required for the outcome to follow, because the test turns on what was produced. Any explanation the Operative submits is considered.

Note. The deliverables for a service accepted are mandatory under agreement clause 3.5 and form part of the work contracted with the customer.

Entry 14. A condition failure was reported and the evidence does not establish it.

Situation. An access or condition failure was reported, and the evidence submitted does not establish that the condition was not met.

Test. 17.2(b), which then directs the outcome.

Outcome. 17.3(a) where no deliverable was produced, by 17.2(d). 17.3(b) where some but not all were produced, by 17.2(c). 17.3(c) where all of them were produced, by 17.2(b) itself.

Evidence. The submission that was made. An Operative may submit further evidence on appeal under agreement clause 17.8.

Note. This is not a finding of bad faith. It is a finding that the evidence does not show what it was offered to show, and the outcome then follows from what was actually produced.

7.5 Other outcomes

Entry 15. The customer's report is not supported by the evidence.

Situation. A customer reports a problem and the review finds the report inaccurate or made in bad faith.

Test. Agreement clause 17.7.

Outcome. 17.3(c). The Operative is paid in full and no amount is refunded at the Operative's expense.

Evidence. The completion photographs and any evidence the customer submits.

Note. Repeated reports that reviews do not support are dealt with as a pattern under agreement clause 17.9, never by disbelieving a single report.

Entry 16. The review cannot be decided because evidence was not supplied.

Situation. Evidence needed to apply the tests is requested and is not supplied within 14 days.

Test. Agreement clause 17.1.

Outcome. 17.3(e). No change is made and the booking is paid and refunded as it stood.

Evidence. Not applicable. This entry exists because the absence of evidence has a stated consequence rather than an open one.

8. REASONS AND APPEAL

Every review produces an outcome and the reasons for it, given to the Operative within 5 working days. An appeal may be brought within 14 days by submitting further evidence or explanation, and is responded to within 5 working days. An appeal may change the outcome in whole or in part. That is agreement clause 17.8.

A review is a question about the vehicle and the booking. Its outcome is not a measure of the Operative's performance and is not an assessment of the Operative. That is agreement clause 17.5.

9. AMENDMENT

Zuno may add or amend an entry in this Policy on notice. Doing so is not a change to the Zuno Operative Agreement, provided the tests at 17.2 are unchanged, which is agreement clause 25.4.

An entry that would need an outcome the tests at 17.2 cannot reach is not an entry. It is a change to the agreement, and it is made there or not at all.