header-logo header-logo

01 April 2026
Issue: 8156 / Categories: Legal News , Financial services litigation , Consumer , Compensation
printer mail-detail

Motor finance taskforce and pay-out scheme set out

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) set out its £7.5bn redress scheme for consumers affected by mis-sold motor finance loans this week

More than 12 million agreements made between 2007 and 2024 are eligible for compensation, averaging £830 per pay-out.

The FCA has designed its scheme so that applicants avoid using claims management companies and law firms.

It has also, along with the Solicitors Regulation Authority and other regulators, launched a taskforce to tackle poor handling of motor finance claims by some claims management companies and law firms, following the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment exposing the scandal, Johnson v FirstRand Bank [2025] UKSC 33.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll