14 March 2025 / Eddie Flanagan , Harpreet Sandhu

Issue: 8108 / Categories: Features , Commercial , Consumer , Financial services litigation

Motor finance commissions: has the dust settled?

With shockwaves from the motor finance commissions case continuing to reverberate, Eddie Flanagan & Harpreet Sandhu explain why it is time for the financial services sector to reflect on compliance & customer trust

The Johnson v FirstRand Bank case ruling on undisclosed motor finance commissions has led to industry shockwaves, and massive compensation provisions, raising concerns over rising regulatory costs.
The judgment highlights the need for transparency in the form of clear disclosure, stronger consumer protections, and practical, balanced regulations.
The wider implications of this case include heightened scrutiny, which challenges financial institutions to adapt while balancing compliance costs and innovation.

In November 2024, Santander UK announced that it had set aside £295m to potentially compensate motor finance customers following the landmark Court of Appeal judgment in the combined cases of Johnson v FirstRand Bank, Wrench v FirstRand Bank and Hopcraft v Close Brothers Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 1282 (‘Johnson’). This provision significantly impacted Santander’s quarterly profits, which fell to £143m

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

Motor finance commissions: has the dust settled?

The Johnson v FirstRand Bank case ruling on undisclosed motor finance commissions has led to industry shockwaves, and massive compensation provisions, raising concerns over rising regulatory costs.
The judgment highlights the need for transparency in the form of clear disclosure, stronger consumer protections, and practical, balanced regulations.
The wider implications of this case include heightened scrutiny, which challenges financial institutions to adapt while balancing compliance costs and innovation.

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations

What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection?

NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR

Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?

NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap

When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases

When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ

Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026

NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue

Error message

Motor finance commissions: has the dust settled?

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker