Upheld: goods of unsatisfactory quality; failure to facilitate right to reject complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited trading as Oodle

Decision detail

Summary

Miss M purchased a used electric car under a hire purchase agreement from Oodle in November 2025. The car developed charging faults within days of acquisition, confirmed by two independent diagnostic reports showing an internal control unit fault. Miss M exercised her right to reject the car, but Oodle made this conditional on allowing the dealer to collect the car for further investigation, which Miss M refused. Oodle then rejected her complaint. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding that the fault was clearly established within 30 days, giving Miss M the statutory right to reject under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, and that Oodle as the supplier was responsible for deciding on rejection, not the dealer. Oodle was ordered to end the agreement, take back the car, reimburse all payments from 24 November 2025 onwards, reimburse diagnostic costs, and pay £250 compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which requires suppliers to ensure goods are of satisfactory quality. For a four-year-old car with 36,600 miles, a reasonable person would expect it to be in reasonable condition and free from anything other than relatively minor defects, with trouble-free motoring for some time. Oodle's own final response established that a fault was present and confirmed by two independent diagnostic reports. The fault occurred within 30 days, giving Miss M the short-term right to reject. The ombudsman rejected Oodle's argument that further investigation was necessary, as the fault was already clearly established. Oodle, as the supplier, was responsible for deciding on rejection, not the dealer or a third party.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website