Upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods; failure to repair within reasonable time without significant inconvenience complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr G purchased a used car via hire purchase with Oodle in March 2025. In May 2025, the cambelt snapped causing catastrophic engine failure, with an independent engineer confirming the fault was present at point of sale. Although Oodle acknowledged the fault and offered repair, there were significant delays: a 15-week delay before rejecting Mr G's rejection request, and further delays in January-February 2026 meant the car had not been collected for repair by February 2026. The ombudsman found that Oodle breached Section 23 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 by failing to repair within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience, as Mr G had been unable to use the car for eleven months while continuing to make payments. The complaint was upheld and Mr G was awarded full refund of payments, diagnostic costs, interest, and £200 compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Oodle has a right to repair under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Section 23 requires repairs to be completed within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer. The 15-week initial delay and subsequent delays in January-February 2026 breached this requirement. The car remained off the road for eleven months, Mr G continued paying for goods he could not use, and he experienced significant inconvenience including blocked access to alternative transport and health-related implications. Given these circumstances, rejection was the fair and reasonable remedy.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website