Not upheld: unaffordable lending / misunderstanding of loan terms complaint against Oodle Financial Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr E complained about a hire purchase agreement with Oodle Financial Services Limited entered into in May 2025 for £17,730 over 60 months with monthly repayments of approximately £520. Mr E claimed he misunderstood the agreement, believing it was an extension to a prior arrangement with repayments of around £400 per month and a borrowing limit of £20,000, and that the repayments were unaffordable. Oodle's Pre-contract credit information document clearly stated the total amount payable was £31,322.80 and detailed the monthly repayment schedule across multiple pages, which Mr E electronically signed. The ombudsman found Oodle's documentation was clear and comprehensive, the affordability assessment was reasonable, and there was no evidence of irresponsible lending or unfair treatment. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Oodle provided clear and comprehensive documentation on multiple pages (pages 1, 8-10) explicitly stating the total credit amount (£17,730), the monthly repayment amounts (£520.38 for 58 months plus first and final payments of £570.38), and the total amount payable (£31,322.80). The document also informed Mr E of his right to withdraw within 15 days. While Mr E claimed a misunderstanding occurred, no records of such discussions existed. The affordability assessment was reasonable, using verified figures and reasonable calculations for existing debts and living expenses. The ombudsman concluded Oodle was not responsible for Mr E's misunderstanding and found no evidence of irresponsible lending or unfair treatment under Section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website