Millions of motorists will have to wait until next year to receive motor finance compensation after Supreme Court case, competition watchdog reveals
The Financial Conduct Agency announced the development this afternoon after a Supreme Court ruling on Friday – but said it would 'take time to establish a (compensation) scheme'.
The FCA estimates 'most individuals will probably receive less than £950 in compensation' per claim, with the total value of the scheme between £9bn and £18bn. Some individuals who bought several cars via hire purchase could receive multiple payouts.
Officials said they hope 'to start getting people any money they are owed next year'.
In the meantime, the watchdog urged people to wait rather than taking action via a claims management company or law firm as it could 'cost you a significant chunk of any money you get'.
It said it has already taken action against publishers of 225 adverts 'about potentially exaggerated amounts of compensation'.
The FCA's stance was today backed by Money Saving Expert guru, who told his followers on X (formerly known as Twitter) to avoid claims firms or solicitors and that 'the most important thing is to DO nothing'.
The FCA said 'many motor finance firms were not complying with rules or the law by not providing customers with relevant information about commission paid by lenders to the car dealers who sold the loans'.
It defended its action in the wake of the court ruling, saying it 'moved quickly' on 'steps to set up a proposed compensation scheme because it wants to provide clarity and certainty to consumers, firms and investors as quickly as possible'.
But FCA officials stressed that 'want to ensure the integrity of the motor finance market so it works well for consumers now and in the future' and that the compensation scheme would need to 'balance principles including fairness, timeliness, and certainty'.
Nikhil Rathi, chief executive of the FCA, said: 'It will take time to establish a scheme but we hope to start getting people any money they are owed next year.
'Our aim is a compensation scheme that's fair and easy to participate in, so there's no need to use a claims management company or law firm.'
He added: 'It is clear that some firms have broken the law and our rules. It's fair for their customers to be compensated.
'We also want to ensure that the market, relied on by millions each year, can continue to work well and consumers can get a fair deal.'
The FCA is working on rules to govern the finance schemes, used by 2.2m people each year, to ensure lenders 'consistently, efficiently and fairly decide whether someone is owed compensation and how much'.
The FCA said motorists who have already complained don't need to do anything but urged others to submit a complaint, if they think they have paid too much for motor finance.
It added it would be 'working intensively and engaging widely over the coming weeks on the detail of how a scheme would work'.
The Supreme Court's ruling found that hidden commissions from lenders to dealers on car loans were not in themselves unlawful, excluding several million motorists from making claims.
The court said car dealers did not need to operate with a 'single-minded' duty to 'act only in their customers' best interests' when arranging finance – and rejected a claim finance companies had bribed car dealers.
But it found the payment of particularly large commissions, without customers' knowledge, were unfair and affected customers in those cases should be compensated.
The five judges said a case where the commission was 55pc of the total charge for credit was 'unfair' and that a failure to disclose the 'exact nature of the commission, and the concealment of the commercial tie between the dealer and the lender' was wrong.
Analysts for investment bank Jefferies heralded the judgement as a 'huge win' for car financing firms as it means the companies can avoid a much larger compensation bill which some market experts forecasted could be as large as that for PPI (payment protection insurance). The scandal led to payouts totalling £50bn.
To make a report about potential mis-selling of car finance, visit https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/car-finance-complaints
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
16 minutes ago
- The Independent
Sheffield Wednesday players release statement amid club's financial turmoil
Sheffield Wednesday players have issued a statement saying that they are 'extremely concerned' at the lack of clarity around the club's financial situation. Players and staff at the Championship club have had to deal with late wage payments for three months in a row as a consequence of the club's financial issues, with the players deciding to withdraw from a planned friendly against Burnley last week. Wednesday have previously been placed under transfer embargo for payments owed to HMRC, while the EFL imposed ' a three-window fee restriction after exceeding 30 days of late payments between 1 July 2024 and 30 June 2025'. And the statement from the members of the squad highlighted how 'players and staff are now feeling real, practical impacts in their professional and personal lives', adding that they want to make sure that 'decisions taken like the one not to play at Burnley are avoided in the future'. 'As has been well publicised, players, coaching and club staff groups at the club have all been impacted by delayed and overdue payment of salaries,' began the statement. 'This has been a worrying time for us as players but, whist we are often the ones in the spotlight, we are not the only ones involved. We stand together in support with all our colleagues employed by the club who have been affected. 'The decision taken by the players to withdraw from the planned friendly with Burnley was not taken lightly or without consideration. We are fully aware of the added concern this will have caused supporters but trust there is a real understanding of the difficult position we have been put in,' it added. Naturally, the decision to not play the match against Burnley has led to concerns as to what action the players could take as the league season gets underway, with the Owls set to face Leicester City in their first match of the new Championship season. But the players explained that they 'want to reassure fans that there has not been, and will not be, any 'downing of tools' by any of us on the training ground, and we are all working as hard as we can'. 'However, we, like you, want our focus to be fully on what happens on the pitch and the new season ahead. This is proving to be really challenging and we have made it clear to the club that we want this situation to be addressed as soon as possible so decisions taken like the one not to play at Burnley are avoided in the future. We can then all move forward together as a club,' it added. The Owls's pre-season preparations have been thrown into chaos with the transfer embargo, the departure of Danny Rohl and the closure of the North Stand at Hillsborough, and there are doubts over whether they will be able to fulfil their first game of the season. That match comes against Leicester on Sunday, 10 August, with fans planning a protest against owner Dejphon Chansiri, who is under mounting pressure to sell the club.
Reuters
16 minutes ago
- Reuters
McLaren must also deal with disappointment amid runaway success
LONDON, Aug 4 (Reuters) - McLaren boss Zak Brown is preparing to deal with disappointment at the end of the Formula One season, even as the team enjoy one of their most dominant years and a 200th grand prix win at the weekend. As the title battle between Oscar Piastri and teammate Lando Norris heats up, the McLaren pair separated by just nine points after Sunday's Hungarian Grand Prix, the American conceded he was thinking also about how to handle the aftermath. Red Bull's reigning champion Max Verstappen, the McLaren drivers' closest rival, is now 97 points off the pace and told reporters at the weekend that he may not win again this year given his car's issues. Even before the weekend, both Piastri and Norris cast caution aside and called it a two-horse race. One of them will surely end the year celebrating a dream come true. The other will rue what might have been, with a new engine era next season shaking everything up again and chances potentially disappearing. Losing always hurts, doubly so when it is to a teammate with the same car, and Brown said McLaren would have to deal with the situation sensitively when -- although he still insisted on saying if -- the time came. "Eventually... we'll just sit down and actually have a conversation and go 'right, one of you is going to win and it's going to be the best day of your life. One of you is going to lose. How do you want us to handle that?'," he told a select group of reporters. "We'll actually sit down and go 'Right, you want us to jump up and down and celebrate? This guy won'. So we're fully aware and sensitive to 'how do you celebrate that situation?'." Australian Piastri has won six races to Norris's five but the Briton has momentum going into the August break, with three wins from his last four starts. The pair have had seven one-two finishes from 14 races, including the last four, and have left rivals trailing. McLaren are so far ahead in the constructors' standings -- 299 points over Ferrari -- that the crown is a given. Much has been made of the potential for a falling out between friends, for clashes on track given what is at stake, but Brown was sanguine and said the relationship was only growing stronger. When Norris ran into the back of Piastri as he challenged for the lead in Canada in June, the Briton defused the situation by immediately taking responsibility. Piastri locked up behind Norris in Hungary on Sunday, in what could have been a repeat of that Montreal accident, but no contact was made. Brown said there was no 'elephant in the room' at McLaren, with the drivers having complete transparency on strategy and how the team go about racing, and he expected more close calls in future. "There's competitiveness brewing... as the championship builds, I'm sure that tension will grow," said the boss. "We're fully anticipating them 'swapping paint' again at some point, I'm very confident it won't be deliberate, which is where you then get into the problems. "They will have racing incidents in their further time here at McLaren, we know that and they know that, so we're not afraid of that. "I'm positive they're never going to run each other off the track, and that's where you get into bad blood. So they're free to race... there are rules around our racing, which is respect your teammate, they know that."
Daily Mail
16 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
I was slapped an £18 Clean Air Zone fine then wasted FIVE months and £100s fighting the tickets... council is to blame
On the face of it, an innocuous work trip to Bristol offers the chance to get out of the office and take in a new part of the country with a few colleagues. But, for Colin Griffiths, what promised to be an enticing two-day visit to the West Country turned into a five-month ordeal as a battle over a pair of Clean Air Zone fines prompted sleepless nights, a ruined holiday and a spiralling bill on the company card. The 56-year-old, from Bedford, was initially handed a reduced penalty of £18 but, despite paying it immediately, saw it increase more than 10-fold to £267 after the council claimed he had not coughed up the cash. In reality, it was the local authority that had been kicking its heels, taking weeks at a time to respond to Mr Griffiths's appeals and hiking the fines with no apparent rhyme or reason. The beleaguered employee eventually paid the heavily inflated amount just to put the nightmare behind him, but it left a distinctly sour taste in his mouth. He told the Daily Mail that he should not even have been fined in the first place. 'I didn't see any any notices whatsoever,' he said. 'Absolutely none. 'My friend, subsequently, said, "yeah, they're an absolute nightmare, their signs are not obvious at all."' A month after his two-night stay in the city in early October 2024, Mr Griffiths was told by the company's accountant that he had received two fines for breaching a Clean Air Zone in the Green Party-run city. The policy was introduced in November 2022 and applies to all vehicles except a limited number of petrol-powered vehicles released since 2006; one type of diesel vehicles released since the end of 2015; fully electric or hydrogen fuel cell vehicles; Energy Saving Trust's Clean Vehicle Retrofit Accreditation Scheme vehicles; and motorbikes. It is one of seven such zones in England, with London boasting a similar but separate Ultra Low Emission Zone (Ulez). But Mr Griffiths was none the wiser about the scheme, which meant his car had been slapped with a £9 daily charge, boosted to £69 each thanks to a supposed delay in paying despite the council not contacting him for four weeks. He appealed both of them - a decision that would prompt months of misery and a penalty which would soon spiral out of control. It took the council a further four weeks to respond to his correspondence, at which point it said he could be let off with a £9 fine for the Sunday offence, with seemingly no news regarding the Saturday one. Mr Griffiths claims he paid this straight away, through the link and code provided, and the money left his account, heralding what he thought was the end of an already frustrating ordeal. He should be so lucky. In January, Bristol City Council revisited the saga and told him he had not paid the fine after all and that he had supposedly ignored letters of reminder over the festive period. An investigation later found that he had paid the sum to Bath Council instead, although Mr Griffiths is insistent he used the link and reference code provided by Bristol. The local authority also finally got back to Mr Griffiths about the Saturday penalty and said that this was also late, meaning he owed £129 for this one alone. All this, despite it being the first correspondence he had had regarding the Saturday fine since he appealed it back in November. 'They just kept putting on more and more fines and fees,' he said. Nonetheless, he dug into his pockets to pay the penalty and end the saga once and for all. But it was still far from over. In February, Bristol revisited the Sunday penalty, claiming he had not paid it in December when he said he had. It turned out the fine somehow went to Bath Council despite Mr Griffiths using the link and code provided by Bristol in their email. The upshot was a rehiking of the already hiked penalty, the £120 added onto the original £9 would be shooting up to £180, creating a mega Clean Air fine of £189. Bristol also threatened the increasingly stressed Mr Griffiths with a court appearance. 'I'd been on holiday, and I was getting really stressed about this because their senior manager just wasn't interested in communicating with me anymore,' he said. 'So on that basis, [they said] "tough, it's going to go to a debt recovery agency, so we'll see you in court." 'I actually can't be dealing with this - it's a lot of money, but I don't need the aggravation. It's ruining my holiday. I'm having sleepless nights.' He gave in - and paid the eye-watering £189 figure Bristol had concocted, meaning he had now spent £267 on the two fines, including the £9 December payment and the £69 January transfer. This was painful for Mr Griffiths, who insists he did everything right and any delays were caused by the council's own tardiness. 'I did everything that they asked,' he said. 'I dealt with everything in a timely fashion as soon as I received it and paid them straight away, and even chased them. 'It's upsetting, and I like to do the right thing by people. And I was on holiday and getting these emails, I'm like, "I don't need this aggravation and worrying about it", especially as it's a company car, not mine, and I'm worried. 'My boss knows I wouldn't have abused his hospitality, but it was very stressful, it really was. 'Absolutely [the fact it was company car made it more stressful]. I just felt totally pressured into paying it. 'I paid it and I had to bite the bullet and walk away. I cannot emphasise the stress it put me under.' Will it make him think twice about visiting the Green-run city again? 'Definitely. My friend's wife said you can't obviously see the signs for the Ulez - they don't make it obvious at all,' he said. 'It's a money-making scheme.' For Mr Griffiths, the time for apologies is over and only a refund could make him feel better about his Clean Air Zone nightmare. He added: 'I would love my money back. Not expecting a penny out of them though. It was outrageous. 'I want my money back. Not an apology. 'I can't see compensation happening, but 100 per cent (think I'm entitled to it). They're keyboard warriors - or bullies rather.'
