Thousands of motorists pursuing car finance claims could face another round of legal proceedings after Black Horse and Close Brothers asked the UK Supreme Court to review a ruling on how their cases should be handled.

The two lenders want to challenge a Court of Appeal decision from June 2026, which allowed around 5,800 motor finance claims to continue through just eight claim forms.

At the centre of the dispute is whether so many individual cases can be brought together when the finance agreements involved have different terms and commission arrangements.

The Supreme Court's case record shows that the lenders submitted their application on 15 October 2026 [1]. No decision has yet been made on whether the appeal will be heard.

The development adds another legal question to the car finance scandal, although this case is about court procedures rather than deciding who should receive car finance compensation.

Why are the lenders challenging the earlier ruling?

Black Horse and Close Brothers disagree with the way thousands of claims have been brought before the courts.

The claimants are using a procedure that allows several people to bring their cases under a single claim form. These are known as omnibus claims.

Instead of starting thousands of separate proceedings, the claimants have grouped their cases together because they involve similar complaints about motor finance commission arrangements.

The lenders argue that the agreements are too varied for this approach.

A customer who financed a used car through one dealership may have had very different terms from someone who arranged finance elsewhere. Commission payments, interest rates and the information given to borrowers can also differ from one agreement to another.

These details matter when deciding whether a lender acted unfairly and whether compensation should be paid.

Black Horse and Close Brothers believe the differences between the claims make it difficult to deal with them together.

The dispute is not about whether every motorist deserves the same outcome. It concerns whether the cases can begin and continue under a shared court procedure, even though some questions will need to be answered individually.

What did the Court of Appeal decide?

The lenders previously challenged the use of combined proceedings, but their arguments were unsuccessful.

In March 2025 the High Court agreed that the claims should proceed together [2]. Black Horse and Close Brothers appealed. On 30 June 2026 the Court of Appeal reached a similar conclusion [3]. They allowed around 5,800 claims to proceed, bundled into eight omnibus claim forms. The judges acknowledged that the agreements were not identical. In some cases, borrowers may have been charged a different interest rate or dealt with a different broker. Some may have been told different things about commission. But that did not mean that each case had to have its own claim form.

The court also considered how lead cases could be used to deal with legal questions shared by several claimants.

This was an important decision for the motorists involved because it allowed the existing proceedings to continue without requiring thousands of separate claims to be issued.

But the ruling did not establish that all claimants had been misled or were entitled to a car finance refund.

Individual circumstances still matter, particularly where consumers are arguing that their agreements created an unfair relationship under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

The lenders now want the Supreme Court to revisit the procedural decision.

Will the Supreme Court hear the case?

That has not been decided.

Black Horse and Close Brothers have applied for permission to appeal, which is the first stage of the Supreme Court process.

The appeal court has to decide whether the case should proceed any further before we have a full appeal. 

If it allows the appeal it will consider whether the Court of Appeal was right to permit the joining together of all these claims.

A successful challenge could affect how the existing proceedings are managed. It may also have implications for other large groups of motorists bringing similar claims.

If permission is refused, the June 2026 Court of Appeal ruling will remain in place.

There is currently no date for a Supreme Court car finance appeal hearing, and the lenders' application has not overturned the earlier decision.

But if you are a motorist who has one of these claims pending that is just a technical point. The appeal does not mean your claim has been thrown out.

How does this relate to the FCA car finance compensation scheme?

There are now two separate legal disputes affecting the wider motor finance industry, and it is easy to confuse them.

The latest Supreme Court application concerns the way groups of car finance mis-selling claims are brought through the courts.

The other dispute involves the Financial Conduct Authority's (FCA) Motor Finance Redress Scheme, which was introduced in March 2026 [4].

That scheme is intended to compensate consumers affected by certain unfair commission arrangements in agreements taken out between 6 April 2007 and 1 November 2024.

The FCA estimates that around 12.1 million agreements could qualify, with average car finance compensation of approximately £829 per eligible agreement [5].

On 26 October 2026, the FCA confirmed that the Upper Tribunal had extended the hearing dates to 16 February to 3 March 2027, following further directions on expert evidence and disclosure [6]. A judgment is expected in the months after the hearing. The compensation scheme remains partially suspended, with no confirmed date for payments [7].

The Black Horse and Close Brothers Supreme Court application does not change that timetable.

It also does not change the eligibility rules under the FCA scheme.

The distinction is straightforward. One case concerns how claims can proceed through the courts. The other concerns the legality of the FCA's compensation framework.

What does this mean for motorists with existing claims?

For anyone part of the Black Horse car finance claims or Close Brothers car finance claims, the immediate question is whether the Supreme Court will allow another appeal.

If it does, there may be further arguments about how the cases should be managed before the underlying compensation disputes can be resolved.

That could affect the progress of the claims involved, although no further delay has been confirmed.

Motorists who have already complained directly to their lenders are in a different position. Their complaints are not automatically affected by this procedural challenge.

Consumers can still raise concerns about historic finance agreements, including Personal Contract Purchase (PCP) and hire purchase (HP) arrangements.

Having taken out one of these agreements does not necessarily mean someone was affected by mis-sold car finance. Whether compensation is due depends on what happened when the finance was arranged and which rules apply.

Motorists can complain directly to their lenders for free. They can also choose to seek assistance from an FCA regulated claims management company or a solicitor, although fees may apply.

There is no need to submit another complaint simply because Black Horse and Close Brothers have applied to the Supreme Court.

Could this lead to further delays in car finance compensation?

Court claims could be delayed further if the Supreme Court decides to hear an appeal. If they refuse permission, the previous decision from the Court of Appeal will stand.

If you’ve been keeping up with our FCA car finance claims update, you may remember that court claims and the FCA compensation scheme are two separate processes. The timelines facing those taking legal action may differ from those faced by consumers waiting on compensation from the scheme.

The next major milestone for the FCA scheme is the Upper Tribunal hearing scheduled for February 2027. However, for those who are wondering when PCP claims are paid out, there is still no confirmed date for payment yet.

What happens next in the car finance scandal?

The next step in this dispute is a decision from the Supreme Court on whether Black Horse and Close Brothers can appeal.

Until then, the Court of Appeal's June 2026 ruling remains in place.

The outcome could influence how large numbers of similar motor finance claims are dealt with in future. It will not, by itself, decide whether individual borrowers are entitled to compensation.

Meanwhile, the FCA continues to prepare for the February 2027 Upper Tribunal hearing, where separate challenges to its compensation scheme will be considered.

For motorists, the latest development does not change the option of checking an old finance agreement or making a complaint.

The legal proceedings may determine how claims are handled and when decisions can be reached. Whether someone is owed money will still depend on their agreement and the circumstances surrounding it.

_________

References:

1. The Supreme Court's case record shows that the lenders submitted their application on 15 October 2026 - https://supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2026-0154
2. In March 2025 the High Court agreed that the claims should proceed together - https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/6a440b3fd8769669b493beea#:~:text=Legal%20Issues%20Presented%20*%20Whether%20a%20single,that%20justify%20common%20disposal%20or%20lead%2Ftest%20cases.
3. On 30 June 2026 the Court of Appeal reached a similar conclusion - https://rlksolicitors.com/news-insights/court-of-appeal-upholds-use-of-multi-claimant-claim-forms-in-motor-finance-litigation
4. the Financial Conduct Authority's (FCA) Motor Finance Redress Scheme, which was introduced in March 2026 - https://www.fca.org.uk/publications/policy-statements/ps26-3-motor-finance-consumer-redress-scheme
5. The FCA estimates that around 12.1 million agreements could qualify, with average car finance compensation of approximately £829 per eligible agreement - https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/policy/ps26-3.pdf
6. On 26 October 2026, the FCA confirmed that the Upper Tribunal had extended the hearing dates to 16 February to 3 March 2027, following further directions on expert evidence and disclosure - https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/documents/motor-finance-directions-oct-2026.pdf
7. The compensation scheme remains partially suspended, with no confirmed date for payments - https://www.fca.org.uk/news/statements/motor-finance-scheme-partially-suspended