Collective actions
Court of Appeal ruling on Johnson v. Firstrand Bank looks to pay out billions for motor finance customers
In a victory for consumer rights, the Court of Appeal has ruled in favour of the claimant in the Johnson v. Firstrand Bank case, setting a historic precedent in the motor finance sector.
In a groundbreaking moment for consumer rights, the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Johnson v. Firstrand Bank has set a new precedent in the UK motor finance industry. The decision, secured with the backing of Sentinel Legal and HD Law, holds lenders responsible for mis-selling practices in Personal Contract Purchase (PCP) agreements, a move that could see banks return over £21 billion to consumers.
The Johnson case exposed unethical mis-selling practices in the motor finance sector, where consumers signed PCP agreements with undisclosed fees and inflated interest rates. Many customers entered these agreements under the impression they were receiving fair terms, only to be paying high interest rates. The Court of Appeal’s decision mandates transparency, requiring lenders to prioritise clear terms and consumer rights in their finance agreements.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has noted the implications of this ruling and is expected to respond by tightening regulatory measures.
Sentinel Legal Director Sam Ward described the decision as a ‘major win for consumer justice,’ explaining, “The finance industry has, for too long, benefited from the murky nature of PCP agreements. This ruling empowers consumers and holds banks accountable for unfair practices.”
Kevin Durkin, Director at HD Law emphasised the role of the courts in exposing these hidden commission structures that have historically enriched lenders and dealerships at the expense of consumers. “For years, commissions were buried in fine print,” Durkin noted. “This ruling emphasises the need for transparency and sets a new industry standard.”
This ruling compels the motor finance sector to confront the financial implications of mis-selling PCP agreements, with lenders now likely to face substantial claims for redress.
The ramifications of the Court of Appeal’s ruling are expected to impact across the motor finance industry, particularly affecting lenders who have relied heavily on commission-based agreements and high-interest PCP deals. The FCA, already engaged in monitoring the motor industry with the recent judicial review involving Barclays, is poised to step up its regulatory oversight. This increased scrutiny could prompt further industry-wide changes, with more banks and finance providers reassessing their practices to meet new transparency standards.
With further cases likely, this ruling not only brings immediate financial relief to many but also signals a step towards greater accountability within the finance sector.
How can Slater and Gordon help?
If you took out a financial agreement before 28 January 2021, you could be one of the thousands in the UK to be owed mis-sold finance compensation. When customers take out motor finance contracts, it is essential they are given the information they need to determine whether the contract they are entering into works for them and is financially valid.
If you have taken out a PCP or HP contract where information has been withheld, or purposefully confused or hidden, you may have been mis-sold and are therefore entitled to make a claim. To find out if you are entitled, visit here