Not upheld: irresponsible lending and unaffordable credit complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr R complained that Oodle irresponsibly lent to him for a car finance agreement in February 2020 without conducting adequate affordability checks. He argued the credit was unaffordable and that Oodle failed to verify his income sufficiently. Mr R later referenced gambling transactions visible in his bank statements as evidence of financial difficulty. The ombudsman found that Oodle conducted reasonable and proportionate checks based on Mr R's declared income of £45,000, credit reference agency data showing five existing accounts totalling £14,000, and ONS statistical expenditure data. The checks showed Mr R had ample disposable income to meet the monthly payments. Since the gambling transactions were not evident from information available at application, there was nothing to alert Oodle to conduct further checks. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied FCA CONC rules requiring reasonable and proportionate affordability checks. Oodle's checks—examining declared income, credit reference agency data on existing commitments, and ONS statistical expenditure data—were proportionate to the type and amount of credit being provided. The checks showed Mr R had ample disposable income to meet monthly payments. The gambling transactions were not evident from the information Oodle obtained at application, so there was nothing to put them on notice that further checks were required. The rules do not require lenders to see full evidence of income and expenditure in every case, and the use of statistical data was reasonable and proportionate.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website