header-logo header-logo

Right to redress for bank customers?

176259
Banks have new duties to protect consumers —so why can’t consumers sue for breach, ask Michael Brown & Harriet Campbell
  • Considers the new duties on banks, the apparent policy shift away from the private right of action, and looks at the potential consequences for both consumers and financial institutions.

Fairness to consumers and the integrity of the financial markets underpin the new duties being imposed on financial institutions in 2024. But is it fair that a consumer can only seek redress for breach from an ombudsman and not the court? And why can’t consumers have a private right of action for breach of these duties when such a right exists for breaches of other Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) rules?

The Consumer Duty & the reimbursement rules

The Consumer Duty came into force for most financial products in July 2023, and by July 2024 will be fully in force. The duty is intended to promote fairness and is ‘outcomes-based’. But if the outcome is not what

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

NLJ Career Profile: Kadie Bennett, Anthony Collins

NLJ Career Profile: Kadie Bennett, Anthony Collins

Kadie Bennett, senior associate at Anthony Collins and chair of the Resolution West Midlands Group, discusses her long-standing passion for family law and calls for unity in the profession

Osborne Clarke—Lara Burch

Osborne Clarke—Lara Burch

Firm appoints new UK senior partner for 2026

Keoghs—Louise Jackson & Katie Everson

Keoghs—Louise Jackson & Katie Everson

Healthcare and sports legal team expands in the north west

NEWS
Lawyers and users of the business and property courts are invited to share their views on disclosure, in particular the operation of PD 57AD and the use of Technology Assisted Review (TAR) and artificial intelligence (AI)
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
back-to-top-scroll