Upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods / insufficient durability complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited trading as Oodle Car Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B purchased a five-year-old used car with 50,862 miles through a hire purchase agreement with Oodle in March 2025. The car had an engine management light requiring repair before collection. After only three months and 3,700 miles of use, the engine catastrophically failed with a connecting rod breaching the engine block. Oodle relied on an independent engineer's report suggesting customer neglect, but the ombudsman found this unsupported given the recent full service, absence of warning lights, and the premature failure. The ombudsman concluded the car was not of satisfactory quality due to insufficient durability and a pre-existing fault, upholding Mr B's complaint and ordering Oodle to end the agreement, refund payments and deposit, and pay £200 compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Report B suggested customer neglect, the lack of substantive knowledge of the cause of engine failure, combined with the service history showing recent full service and oil filter service just six miles before supply, Mr B's reasonable expectation of correct fluid levels, the absence of warning lights, and the catastrophic failure occurring only three months and 3,700 miles after supply, all pointed to a pre-existing fault. The ombudsman concluded the fault was likely present or developing at point of sale, evidenced by the engine management light requiring repair before collection. The car's failure to last beyond three months at only five years old and 54,591 miles demonstrated insufficient durability. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, goods must be of satisfactory quality, including durability. The ombudsman rejected Oodle's customer neglect argument as unsupported by the evidence.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website