Mastercard to pay out £200million to millions of customers
Mastercard is set to compensate millions of customers with payouts worth up to £70 each, following a landmark legal battle.
The courts have now given the green light to the deal, ensuring that affected customers will receive their due compensation. Walter Merricks, who initiated the claim, stated that he embarked on this case because he was convinced that "Mastercard's fees paid by retailers for processing card transactions had been unlawfully high". He believed that virtually all UK consumers had been unfairly disadvantaged over extended periods, paying inflated prices as retailers passed on these costs, reports Birmingham Live.
However, as Mr Merricks explained: "As the evidence came to be known through the litigation process, this was the position only in a relatively small proportion of transactions and the settlement reflects that".
READ MORE: Vegan family issue 'last warning' to neighbours after BBQ row escalates
READ MORE: Moment one-legged man, 93, Tasered and sprayed with pepper spray by police at care home
He went on to say, "The settlement that has today been finally approved represents a fair and just outcome for UK consumers." For money-saving tips, sign up to our Money newsletter here.
He further added: "On any view, recovering £200million by way of a settlement for UK consumers is a huge sum, and that will translate into a meaningful impact in the pockets of UK consumers.
"During the long course of the case which involved winning a key Supreme Court decision, I have established important precedents to ensure that other collective actions that have followed mine, will have a greater prospect of succeeding.
"And I am pleased to have forged this new path towards a UK regime that allows consumers to get meaningful access to justice, and that will act as a deterrent to companies from acting unlawfully.
"I am proud to have achieved a substantial settlement sum, indeed the largest settlement for a group of UK consumers through the English courts."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Eastern Bank to close 13 branches as result of HarborOne acquisition
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up FINANCE Advertisement Credit scores decline for millions as US student loan collections restart People in favor of canceling student debt protested outside the Supreme Court on June 30, 2023, in Washington. Mariam Zuhaib/Associated Press Millions of Americans are seeing their credit scores suffer now that the US government has resumed referring missed student loan payments for debt collection. After 90 days of non-payment, student loan servicers report delinquent, or past-due, accounts to major credit bureaus, which use the information to recalculate the borrower's score. Falling behind on loan payments therefore can affect an individual's credit rating as severely as filing for personal bankruptcy. A lower credit score makes it harder or more expensive to obtain car loans, mortgages, credit cards, auto insurance and other financial services at a time when inflation, high interest rates, and layoffs have strained the resources of some consumers. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reported that in the first three months of 2025, 2.2 million student loan recipients saw their scores drop by 100 points, and an additional 1 million had drops of 150 points or more. — ASSOCIATED PRESS Advertisement WORKPLACE Tax law might be coming for your free office snacks A change in tax law may make companies rethink a popular workplace perk: food and drink. Starting in 2026, companies will no longer be able to deduct the cost of on-site cafeterias or takeout for workers who stay late. And accountants say the change probably applies to office snacks and coffee, too. Though the cost of such staff freebies is relatively small in the grand scheme of employee benefits, the potential change in tax law comes as many businesses are trimming expenses in the face of tariffs and economic uncertainty. US tax law allow companies to deduct certain business costs, such as insurance, rent, and office supplies, from their income before they pay taxes. But meals are treated differently, depending on the category. For instance, a company can deduct 50 percent of the restaurant bill for taking a client or a job candidate to lunch under current law. But a provision that allows companies to deduct cafeteria costs or any meals they provide in the workplace 'for the convenience of the employer' is poised to sunset in 2026. If it does, US businesses would be looking at an additional $300 million a year in taxes, based on estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation. — WASHINGTON POST Advertisement MEDIA What was Terry Moran thinking? Terry Moran, a longtime ABC News correspondent, was ousted from his network last week over a post on social media platform X that castigated the Trump administration in searing, personal terms. Lorenzo Bevilaqua/ABC/Photographer: Lorenzo Bevilaqua/ Terry Moran wasted no time ending the speculation. 'It wasn't a drunk tweet,' he said, flashing a lopsided grin Sunday as he chatted on Zoom. Moran, a longtime ABC News correspondent, was ousted from his network last week over a post on social media platform X that castigated the Trump administration in searing, personal terms. In his first interview since then, he offered no apologies. Recounting how he came to write his fateful post, Moran, 65, said it was 'a normal family night' that began with a walk with his dog: 'I was thinking about our country, and what's happening, and just turning it over in my mind.' He returned home for family dinner and a movie. He and his wife put their children to bed. And then: 'I wrote it, and I said, 'That's true.'' 'That' was a provocative post, published after midnight June 8, tearing into Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, as 'richly endowed with the capacity for hatred.' Moran wrote that Miller 'eats his hate' as 'spiritual nourishment' and assigned the term 'world-class hater' to both Miller and President Trump, whom the correspondent had interviewed in the Oval Office weeks earlier. The since-deleted post stunned Moran's colleagues and prompted a furious riposte from Vice President JD Vance, who demanded an apology from ABC. Two days later, the network said it would not renew Moran's contract, citing 'a clear violation of ABC News policies.' There had been no triggering event, Moran said, only his own ruminations, which he continues to stand behind: 'I don't think you should ever regret telling the truth. And I don't.' — NEW YORK TIMES Advertisement TECH The Trump family's next venture? A mobile phone company. Donald Trump Jr. participated in the announcement of Trump Mobile in New York's Trump Tower on June 16. Richard Drew/Associated Press The Trump family is licensing its name to a new mobile phone service, the latest in a string of ventures announced while Donald Trump is in the White House despite ethical concerns that the US president could mold public policy for personal gain. Eric Trump, the president's son running The Trump Organization in his absence, announced a new venture Monday called Trump Mobile. The plan is to sell phones that will be built in the United States, and the phone service will maintain a call center in the country as well. The announcement of the new mobile phone and service, called T1 Mobile, follows several real estate deals for towers and resorts in the Middle East, including a golf development in Qatar announced in April. A $1.5 billion partnership to build golf courses, hotels, and real estate projects in Vietnam was approved last month, though the deal was in the works before Trump was elected. The Trump Organization on Monday said the new, gold-colored phone available for $499 in August, called the T1 Phone, won't be designed or made by Trump Mobile, but by another company. The Trump Organization did not respond immediately to a request for more details. — ASSOCIATED PRESS GOVERNMENT Trump fires nuclear regulator as White House seeks to soften oversight A top nuclear safety regulator was fired by the White House in a two-sentence email Friday night as the administration attempts to dilute the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's independent oversight of power plants. The email, sent to Commissioner Christopher Hanson by Trent Morse, a deputy director of presidential personnel, does not give any reason for the firing. President Trump has signed executive orders aimed at speeding up approvals of nuclear reactors on US soil during his term. One of the orders last month accused the commission of stifling the nuclear power industry by being overly cautious about safety. The Office of Personnel and the White House did not immediately respond to request for comment. Hanson said in a statement that the firing is 'without cause' and 'contrary to existing law and longstanding precedent regarding removal of independent agency appointees.' His term was supposed to run through June 2029. Hanson declined an interview request. His statement does not indicate whether he plans to pursue legal action. — WASHINGTON POST Advertisement AVIATION Air India crash seen triggering $475 million in insurance claims The crash site of Air India Ltd. Flight 171 in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India, on June 13. Siddharaj Solanki/Bloomberg India's deadliest plane crash in more than decade is set to send shock waves through the aviation insurance industry and trigger one of the country's costliest claims, estimated at around $475 million. The claim for the aircraft hull and engine is estimated at around $125 million, according to Ramaswamy Narayanan, chairman and managing director at General Insurance Corporation of India, one of the firms that has provided coverage for Air India. He estimates additional liability claims for loss of life for passengers and others will be around $350 million. The financial repercussions of the crash that killed 241 people on board and others as it fell in a densely populated part of Ahmedabad in western India on Thursday will ripple through the global aviation insurance and reinsurance market. It's also likely to make insurance costlier for airlines in India. — BLOOMBERG NEWS
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Supreme Court to hear appeal from Chevron in landmark Louisiana coastal damage lawsuits
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The Supreme Court announced Monday it will hear an appeal from Chevron, Exxon and other oil and gas companies that lawsuits seeking compensation for coastal land loss and environmental degradation in Louisiana should be heard in federal court. The companies are appealing a 2024 decision by a federal appeals court that kept the lawsuits in state courts, allowing them to move to trial after more than a decade in limbo. A southeast Louisiana jury then ordered Chevron to pay upwards of $740 million to clean up damage to the state's coastline. The verdict reached in April was the first of dozens of lawsuits filed in 2013 against leading oil and gas companies in Louisiana alleging they violated state environmental laws for decades. While plaintiffs' attorneys say the appeal encompasses at least 10 cases, Chevron disagrees and says the court's ruling could have broader implications for additional lawsuits. Chevron argues that because it and other companies began oil production and refining during World War II as a federal contractor, these cases should be heard in federal court, perceived to be friendlier to businesses. But the plaintiffs' attorneys — representing the Plaquemines and Jefferson Parish governments — say the appeal is the companies' latest stall tactic to avoid accountability. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit already rejected similar arguments from Chevron. 'It's more delay, they're going to fight till the end and we're going to continue to fight as well,' said John Carmouche, a trial attorney in the Chevron case who is behind the other lawsuits. He noted that the companies' appeal 'doesn't address the merits of the case.' The court's decision to hear the appeal offers the chance for 'fair and consistent application of the law' and will 'help preserve legal stability for the industry that fuels America's economy,' said Tommy Faucheux, president of the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association, in an emailed statement. In April, jurors in Plaquemines Parish — a sliver of land straddling the Mississippi River into the Gulf — found that energy giant Texaco, acquired by Chevron in 2001, had for decades violated Louisiana regulations governing coastal resources by failing to restore wetlands impacted by dredging canals, drilling wells and billions of gallons of wastewater dumped into the marsh. 'No company is big enough to ignore the law, no company is big enough to walk away scot-free,' Carmouche told jurors during closing arguments. Louisiana's coastal parishes have lost more than 2,000 square miles (5,180 square kilometers) of land over the past century, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, which has also identified oil and gas infrastructure as a significant cause. The state could lose another 3,000 square miles (7,770 square kilometers) in the coming decades, its coastal protection agency has warned. Chevron's attorneys had argued that land loss in Louisiana was caused by other factors and that the company should not be held liable for its actions prior to the enactment of a 1980 environmental law requiring companies to obtain permits and restore land they had used. The fact that the lawsuits had been delayed for so long due to questions of jurisdiction was 'bordering on absurd,' the late-federal judge Martin Leach-Cross Feldman remarked in 2022 during oral arguments in one of the lawsuits, according to court filings. He added: 'Frankly, I think it's kind of shameful.' Louisiana's Republican Gov. Jeff Landry, a longtime oil and gas industry supporter, nevertheless made the state a party to the lawsuits during his tenure as attorney general. 'Virtually every federal court has rejected Chevron's attempt to avoid liability for knowingly and intentionally violating state law,' Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement. 'I'll fight Chevron in state or federal court—either way, they will not win.' ___ ___ This story has been corrected to show that Chevron's counsel was 'pleased' with the decision by the Supreme Court, not the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Supreme Court to hear appeal from Chevron in landmark Louisiana coastal damage lawsuits
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The Supreme Court announced Monday it will hear an appeal from Chevron, Exxon and other oil and gas companies that lawsuits seeking compensation for coastal land loss and environmental degradation in Louisiana should be heard in federal court. The companies are appealing a 2024 decision by a federal appeals court that kept the lawsuits in state courts, allowing them to move to trial after more than a decade in limbo. A southeast Louisiana jury then ordered Chevron to pay upwards of $740 million to clean up damage to the state's coastline. The verdict reached in April was the first of dozens of lawsuits filed in 2013 against leading oil and gas companies in Louisiana alleging they violated state environmental laws for decades. While plaintiffs' attorneys say the appeal encompasses at least 10 cases, Chevron disagrees and says the court's ruling could have broader implications for additional lawsuits. Chevron argues that because it and other companies began oil production and refining during World War II as a federal contractor, these cases should be heard in federal court, perceived to be friendlier to businesses. But the plaintiffs' attorneys — representing the Plaquemines and Jefferson Parish governments — say the appeal is the companies' latest stall tactic to avoid accountability. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit already rejected similar arguments from Chevron. 'It's more delay, they're going to fight till the end and we're going to continue to fight as well,' said John Carmouche, a trial attorney in the Chevron case who is behind the other lawsuits. He noted that the companies' appeal 'doesn't address the merits of the case.' Chevron's counsel, Paul Clement said in a statement that the company was 'pleased' with the Supreme Court's decision. Exxon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The court's decision to hear the appeal offers the chance for 'fair and consistent application of the law' and will 'help preserve legal stability for the industry that fuels America's economy,' said Tommy Faucheux, president of the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association, in an emailed statement. In April, jurors in Plaquemines Parish — a sliver of land straddling the Mississippi River into the Gulf — found that energy giant Texaco, acquired by Chevron in 2001, had for decades violated Louisiana regulations governing coastal resources by failing to restore wetlands impacted by dredging canals, drilling wells and billions of gallons of wastewater dumped into the marsh. 'No company is big enough to ignore the law, no company is big enough to walk away scot-free,' Carmouche told jurors during closing arguments. Louisiana's coastal parishes have lost more than 2,000 square miles (5,180 square kilometers) of land over the past century, according to the U.S. Geological Survey , which has also identified oil and gas infrastructure as a significant cause. The state could lose another 3,000 square miles (7,770 square kilometers) in the coming decades, its coastal protection agency has warned . Chevron's attorneys had argued that land loss in Louisiana was caused by other factors and that the company should not be held liable for its actions prior to the enactment of a 1980 environmental law requiring companies to obtain permits and restore land they had used. The fact that the lawsuits had been delayed for so long due to questions of jurisdiction was 'bordering on absurd,' the late-federal judge Martin Leach-Cross Feldman remarked in 2022 during oral arguments in one of the lawsuits, according to court filings. He added: 'Frankly, I think it's kind of shameful.' Louisiana's Republican Gov. Jeff Landry, a longtime oil and gas industry supporter, nevertheless made the state a party to the lawsuits during his tenure as attorney general. 'Virtually every federal court has rejected Chevron's attempt to avoid liability for knowingly and intentionally violating state law,' Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement. 'I'll fight Chevron in state or federal court—either way, they will not win.' ___ Brook is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
