header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
23 October 2014 / David Greene
Issue: 7627 / Categories: Opinion , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Compensating the consumer

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
speakerscorner_green

Post-Jackson could individuals wronged by Wonga secure access to the court at a reasonable cost, asks David Greene

As “class action” lawyers we are often approached by individuals on potential claims against corporations or public bodies. Someone asked me the other day about potential claims against Wonga following the FCA and company’s announcements of the writing off of a huge swathe of debt. I know not if a claim arises but if it does, how do the individuals secure access to the court at a reasonable cost?

A claim brought by a large group sharing the cost and liabilities might be seen as a reasonable way forward. Unfortunately, the post-Jackson world does not lend itself to such a collective approach leaving potential claimants without a reasonable remedy. The collective process we have is ad hoc and in a state of flux. For consumers with small absolute individual losses there is nowhere to turn unless a regulator intervenes as happened with the SWAPS mis-selling and to some extent in Wonga.

Finding a solution

We have

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll