Not upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Miss O purchased a 9-year-old used car via hire purchase agreement with Oodle in May 2025. After experiencing minor repairs to the clutch and battery in June-July 2025, the car suffered catastrophic engine failure in August 2025 after approximately 4,500 miles of driving. Miss O complained that the car was not of satisfactory quality and sought rejection or refund. Oodle rejected the complaint, and the ombudsman upheld Oodle's position, finding that the engineer's expert evidence demonstrated the engine failure was a recent development caused by factors such as poor lubrication occurring after purchase, not an inherent defect present at the time of supply. For a 9-year-old vehicle at this price point, the ombudsman found the car met the standard of satisfactory quality expected by a reasonable person.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which requires goods to be of satisfactory quality. For a used car of this age (9 years old) and price (£4,000), a reasonable person would have lower quality expectations than for a new car. The engineer's expert evidence was critical: the con rod shearing was concluded to be a recent failure caused by factors such as poor lubrication or combustion issues occurring after purchase, not an inherent defect. The fact that Miss O travelled 4,500 miles without engine issues, and that no problems were identified during the pre-purchase service or early repairs, supported the conclusion that no defect existed at the point of sale. Early repairs to wear items like the battery and clutch are not unusual for a 9-year-old vehicle and do not indicate unsatisfactory quality at supply.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website