Upheld: supply of goods of unsatisfactory quality; unfair charges for usage and damage; unfair retention of payments complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited trading as Oodle Car Finance
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6346274 of 2026-05-11T00:00:00+00:00. supply of goods of unsatisfactory quality; unfair charges for usage and damage; unfair retention of payments complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited trading as Oodle Car Finance. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6346274 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-11T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Oodle Financial Services Limited trading as Oodle Car Finance |
| Product | hire purchase agreement (car finance) |
| Claim type | supply of goods of unsatisfactory quality; unfair charges for usage and damage; unfair retention of payments |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Refund deposit payment of £2,331 (minus any dealer contribution); reimburse pro rata monthly repayments from 20 March 2025 until collection; reimburse replacement tyre charge; pay £150 for distress and inconvenience; remove adverse credit file information. All monetary amounts to include 8% simple yearly interest from payment to reimbursement. |
Summary
Miss C purchased a used car via hire purchase with Oodle in June 2023 and complained about defects in January 2025. After repair attempts and Miss C's confirmation on 20 March 2025 that she no longer wanted repairs, the car was collected in June 2026. Oodle charged Miss C for mileage accrual and damage, retaining her deposit and all monthly repayments to cover a £1,200 shortfall. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding that Oodle's usage fee of £0.35 per mile was not specified in the agreement and that it was unfair to retain all payments. The ombudsman ordered Oodle to refund the deposit, reimburse monthly repayments from 20 March 2025 onwards, refund the tyre charge, and pay £150 for distress and inconvenience, with 8% interest on all monetary amounts.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman accepted that the car was of unsatisfactory quality as Oodle had already accepted rejection. The key issue was determining what was fair regarding charges and refunds. The ombudsman found it unreasonable for Oodle to retain all deposits and monthly repayments to cover a usage fee that was not specified in the agreement. The ombudsman determined that Miss C should only pay for fair usage up to 20 March 2025 (when she stopped accepting repairs), as Oodle's delay in acting from January 2025 allowed mileage to continue accruing. The tyre charge was deemed unfair as the evidence did not demonstrate damage to sidewalls, treads, or cracking that would violate BVRLA guidelines.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Oodle Financial Services Limited trading as Oodle Car Finance, all decisions | 19 | 24% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website