Upheld: Goods and services under S75 complaint against Lendable Ltd trading as Autolend
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6418381 of 2026-06-16T00:00:00+00:00. Goods and services under S75 complaint against Lendable Ltd trading as Autolend. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6418381 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-16T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Lendable Ltd trading as Autolend |
| Product | Motor finance (PCP / HP) |
| Claim type | Goods and services under S75 |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Autolend must: (1) end the agreement with Mrs C not liable for payments after collection; (2) collect the car at no cost to Mrs C; (3) remove any adverse credit file entries relating to the agreement; (4) pay Mrs C £200 additional compensation (£400 total) within 28 days, plus 8% simple yearly interest if paid later. |
Summary
Mrs C purchased a used car via hire purchase with Autolend on 14 July 2025. The car developed multiple faults shortly after supply, and Mrs C requested rejection within the 30-day short-term rejection period on 31 July 2025. Autolend proceeded with repairs against Mrs C's wishes, completing them on 27 August 2025. An independent engineer's inspection on 20 November 2025 confirmed that a tyre pressure monitoring system fault remained unrepaired and was present at the point of supply, making the car unsatisfactory quality. The ombudsman upheld Mrs C's complaint, finding she retained her right of rejection under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, as the single permitted repair attempt had failed. Autolend was directed to end the agreement, collect the car at no cost, remove adverse credit entries, and pay £200 additional compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that the car was not of satisfactory quality at the point of supply, as confirmed by the independent engineer's report which identified a tyre pressure monitoring system fault that was present or developing when supplied. The ombudsman determined that accepting a courtesy car while the dealership inspected the car did not constitute acceptance of repair, and all evidence showed Mrs C maintained her request to reject. Even if Mrs C had accepted repair, the CRA provides only a single chance of repair for all faults combined, and this repair attempt failed as the tyre pressure monitoring system fault remained unrepaired. Therefore, Mrs C retained her right of rejection under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Lendable Ltd trading as Autolend, all decisions | 18 | 33% |
| Goods and services under S75, all decisions | 19,872 | 36% |
| Motor finance (PCP / HP), all decisions | 19,840 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website