Not upheld: unsatisfactory quality of goods and misrepresentation complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr L purchased a used car under a hire purchase agreement with OFS in March 2024. The vehicle was almost nine years old with approximately 49,011 miles. Mr L subsequently experienced multiple mechanical issues including clutch failure, alternator belt problems, and suspension wear, requiring significant repairs from April 2025 onwards. He also complained that the vehicle was advertised with an automatic parking feature (park pilot) that was not present and that the vehicle's depreciation left him with negative equity. The ombudsman found no evidence the faults existed at the point of sale and that the issues were consistent with normal wear and tear on an older vehicle. The park pilot misrepresentation claim was rejected as Mr L did not raise it promptly, and vehicle depreciation was found to be a normal market occurrence. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the vehicle experienced multiple faults requiring repair, there was no evidence these faults were present or developing at the point of sale. For a nine-year-old vehicle with over 49,000 miles, the issues experienced (alternator belt, clutch, suspension wear) were consistent with normal wear and tear rather than unsatisfactory quality. Regarding misrepresentation of the park pilot feature, even if mislabelled, the ombudsman was not persuaded this would have induced Mr L to purchase the vehicle, as he did not raise this issue promptly or consistently with OFS or the dealership. The vehicle's depreciation and resulting negative equity were attributed to normal market depreciation and interest charges, not unfair conduct by OFS.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website