The Supreme Court has ruled on the mis-selling of car finance

Today, the Supreme Court made its decision regarding the mis-selling of car finance. This is Slater and Gordon's statement:

“This landmark ruling is positive news for the millions of people who have lost money due to the car finance mis-selling. The court confirmed that for years, consumers have potentially been unfairly overcharged on car finance agreements, and this ruling reinforces their right to pursue justice and recover the compensation they deserve.

“This ruling does however show there is complexity to this issue and why people should continue to have the option to hire a lawyer to help them professionally navigate the process and get what’s due to them.

“The onus is now on the FCA to produce a redress scheme that matches the interests of the Judgment and consumers. We remain concerned that aspects of any proposed redress scheme may inadvertently exclude a significant number of affected consumers. It’s crucial to ensure that the scheme fully considers and protects the interests of individuals experiencing vulnerability. We urge a careful and inclusive design to ensure redress is truly accessible and equitable. In particular it is important that any redress scheme is not left solely in the hands of the lenders in terms of paying compensation, given their role in the mis-selling. As a recent poll showed, the public will not support this and do not trust the wrongdoers to decide who gets compensation.

"We stand ready to work with the FCA to put things right.

“Many people could miss out with a lender led redress scheme, simply because of lender record retention practice and difficulties with tracing people - by moving house or changing their details. That will be unacceptable and fuel public cynicism in the system that is meant to protect their financial interest.

"It is important for affected consumers to have freedom of choice. They are ultimately the ones who have been wronged. If this means they would like to use lawyers to professionally represent them, then this should be an avenue that is available to them. Ultimately consumers have been wronged, and it is important that this does not happen a second time with a flawed redress scheme."