header-logo header-logo

Motor finance commissions: has the dust settled?

211159
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

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll