header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 October 2025 / Fred Philpott
Issue: 8135 / Categories: Opinion , Consumer , Financial services litigation , Commercial , Transport
printer mail-detail

Motor finance: payback time?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
232366
Hot on the heels of the FCA’s proposed redress scheme, Fred Philpott considers the winners & losers

Following the Supreme Court’s decisions on motor finance commission, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published a proposed redress scheme. On 7 October 2025, after the markets closed (the likely financial impact of the proposals dictated this timing, as the cost to the credit business was estimated in the proposal at £11bn), the FCA published for consultation the proposed scheme for the credit businesses involved (‘Consultation paper CP25/27: Motor Finance Consumer Redress Scheme’.

Background

In Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd (London Branch) (trading as Motonovo Finance) and other cases [2025] UKSC 33, [2025] 3 WLR 423 (also known as Hopcraft v Close Brothers Ltd), the Supreme Court rejected allegations that motor finance commission constituted a bribe, or that there was a fiduciary relationship between the motor dealer and the credit provider. However, in the case of Johnson, it was held that there was an unfair relationship under s 140A

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
Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Chair of the Association of Pension Lawyers joins as partner

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Group names Shakespeare Martineau partner head of Sheffield office

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Four legal directors promoted to partner across UK offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll