Not upheld: treatment during financial difficulty; refusal of payment arrangement; contact methods complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6371007 of 2026-06-02T00:00:00+00:00. treatment during financial difficulty; refusal of payment arrangement; contact methods complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6371007 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-02T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Oodle Financial Services Limited |
| Product | hire purchase agreement |
| Claim type | treatment during financial difficulty; refusal of payment arrangement; contact methods |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman reminded Oodle of their continuing obligations to treat consumers in financial difficulty with due consideration and forbearance. |
Summary
Miss C complained about Oodle's treatment when she fell into arrears on a hire purchase agreement for a car due to reduced income from statutory sick pay during a high-risk pregnancy. She proposed a £100 monthly payment arrangement until returning from maternity leave, but Oodle declined after an income and expenditure assessment showed no disposable income. Miss C also complained about phone and text contact after requesting email-only communication. The ombudsman found Oodle acted fairly in declining the unaffordable arrangement, as it would have resulted in unsustainable arrears accumulation, and that continued contact attempts were reasonable given the account's arrears status. The complaint was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Oodle was required to treat Miss C with due consideration and forbearance, but this did not require them to enter an unaffordable payment arrangement. The proposed £100 monthly payment would have resulted in arrears increasing by approximately £435 per month, creating an unsustainable situation with over £6,000 in arrears to repay by the end of the agreement term. The I&E assessment showed no disposable income, and there was insufficient evidence that Miss C's situation would improve in the short term. Oodle's provision of exit options was reasonable and in Miss C's best interests. Regarding contact methods, although Miss C was vulnerable and had requested email-only contact, the account was in arrears and at risk of default, making reasonable attempts at contact through multiple channels appropriate.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Oodle Financial Services Limited, all decisions | 459 | 36% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website