News 8 September 2026 | Andrew Franks |

Customers of collapsed lender Blue Motor Finance who are eventually found to be owed compensation under the FCA's motor finance scheme are unlikely to receive the full amount they are entitled to.
The warning follows Blue Motor Finance Limited's administration and the subsequent sale of most of its business and assets to Hodge MF Limited.
Although the Blue Motor Finance business continues under new ownership, historic compensation liabilities did not transfer to Hodge. They remain with the original Blue Motor Finance Limited, which is now being managed by administrators from EY.
The Financial Conduct Authority has warned that customers owed car finance compensation are unlikely to recover all of the money due to them because of the lender's financial position.
The situation creates an important distinction for anyone with a potential Blue Motor Finance claim: qualifying for compensation and actually recovering the full amount calculated are no longer necessarily the same thing.
The FCA said the lender had been loss-making for several years and faced significant compensation liabilities that it could not meet.
EY's Simon Edel, Alan Hudson and Richard Barker were appointed joint administrators.
Shortly afterwards, most of the company's business and assets were sold through a pre-pack administration to Hodge MF Limited, part of Hodge Bank.
The transaction allowed the Blue Motor Finance business to continue operating and transferred its origination and servicing platform and 168 employees to the new owner.
For existing borrowers, little changed immediately from a practical perspective. Existing finance agreements remained in place and customers were told to continue making their normal repayments.
Behind the scenes, however, there is an important difference between the business that Hodge acquired and the company responsible for historic liabilities.
No. Hodge acquired the business and certain assets, but Blue Motor Finance Limited's existing liabilities did not transfer as part of the transaction.
Hodge has explicitly confirmed that liabilities relating to the FCA car finance compensation scheme remain with the company in administration.
The administrators remain responsible for dealing with actual and potential claims against the old company, including motor finance commission compensation claims.
This distinction is particularly important because the business continues to trade under the Blue Motor Finance name during a transitional period.
A customer could therefore still see the Blue Motor Finance brand while the legal entity responsible for their historic redress is the company in administration.
The issue comes down to insolvency.
The FCA says Blue Motor Finance remains liable for compensation it owes, including compensation arising under the Motor Finance Compensation Scheme.
But being legally liable for a debt does not mean an insolvent company has enough money available to pay it in full.
This includes relevant redress creditors.
Administrators must assess the company's assets and liabilities and distribute available funds according to insolvency rules.
The FCA has consequently warned that it is very unlikely that customers owed compensation will receive the full amount they are owed.
The precise outcome is not yet known. The administrators will determine how many customers are ultimately owed compensation and how much can be distributed to them.
No.
Administration does not automatically make a potential car finance claim disappear.
Blue Motor Finance remains responsible for compensation liabilities relating to its historic agreements, and the administrators are expected to deal with eligible claims as part of the administration.
This creates three separate questions for affected consumers.
First, does the historic Blue Motor Finance agreement qualify under the FCA scheme?
Second, if it qualifies, how much mis-sold car finance compensation should be calculated under the scheme rules?
Third, how much of that amount can actually be recovered from Blue Motor Finance Limited through the administration?
For customers of a solvent lender, the second and third questions would normally be closely connected. Blue's insolvency means they have become separate issues.
A consumer could potentially be found eligible for £1,000 of compensation, for example, without necessarily receiving the full £1,000 from the company in administration.
The amount ultimately recovered will depend on the administration rather than simply the redress calculation.
Generally, no.
The Financial Services Compensation Scheme protects customers when certain authorised financial services firms fail [4], but its protection does not extend to every regulated financial product or activity.
The FCA has specifically said there is generally no FSCS cover for consumer credit lenders.
As a result, compensation owed to Blue customers under the FCA's motor finance scheme will not be covered by the FSCS.
This is particularly significant because there is therefore no automatic mechanism through which the FSCS would simply make up the difference between what Blue owes and what the insolvent company can afford to pay.
The FCA has cautioned against drawing that conclusion.
Blue faced substantial potential redress liabilities, but the regulator says the company had also been running at a loss for a number of years regardless of the compensation it might owe.
It would therefore be misleading to suggest that car finance claims or the FCA compensation scheme alone caused the company's failure.
Historic motor finance liabilities were nevertheless an important financial issue facing the business when it entered administration.
The scheme covers certain motor finance agreements entered into between 6 April 2007 and 1 November 2024, but not every agreement within that period will qualify.
The sale has attracted attention because the operating business was transferred to Hodge while historic liabilities remained with the company in administration.
However, the FCA says the alternatives would have produced a worse outcome for customers owed compensation.
The regulator said that after becoming aware of Blue's financial difficulties, it worked to ensure the firm's decisions produced the best available outcome for redress consumers.
According to the FCA, alternative options would have reduced the likelihood of consumers receiving any redress.
Hodge has made a similar argument.
It says the pre-pack transaction increased the value available for distribution to creditors, including people with motor finance redress claims. Without the transaction, Hodge says Blue Motor Finance Limited would have entered liquidation, resulting in significantly lower compensation for redress claimants.
EY has also said the sale was designed to maximise returns to unsecured creditors while maintaining continuity for more than 100,000 existing borrowers.
The fact that customers may receive less than the compensation they are eventually calculated to be owed therefore does not necessarily mean the sale itself caused the shortfall.
Blue was already in financial difficulty before the transaction took place.
Customers who are still repaying a Blue Motor Finance agreement should continue making their payments as normal.
The administration does not cancel existing finance agreements.
Existing contracts remain with Blue Motor Finance Limited, while Hodge MF Limited is handling the day-to-day servicing of those loans on its behalf following the sale.
Existing direct debits and payment arrangements should continue as before unless customers are told otherwise through official channels.
Customers should not stop repayments because they believe they may have a Blue Motor Finance claim or because the lender entered administration.
Potential compensation and the customer's obligation to make contractual repayments are separate matters.
The position may be different where a finance agreement was sold to another company before the end of its fixed term.
The FCA says the purchaser of the loan may now be responsible for administering the motor finance compensation scheme for that agreement.
Original lenders and debt purchasers are required to cooperate, including by sharing relevant information.
Where a complaint is sent to Blue but responsibility has transferred to the purchaser, the FCA expects the administrators to pass the complaint on.
Likewise, if a consumer complains to the purchaser and it is not responsible, it should forward the complaint to Blue Motor Finance and inform the consumer or their representative.
This means customers should not assume that every historic agreement carrying the Blue Motor Finance name will necessarily be handled in exactly the same way.
EY says the administrators already hold details of people who may potentially be entitled to claim in Blue Motor Finance's administration in connection with the FCA scheme.
They intend to contact relevant individuals when further action is required.
The FCA similarly advises consumers with an existing complaint or claim against Blue that the administrators will contact them.
Consumers can make a complaint themselves without paying a fee. Using a claims management company or law firm is optional, and fees may apply where professional representation is used.
Customers should also be particularly alert to scams.
Blue and the administrators have warned that official information about potential motor finance commission compensation will be provided through recognised Blue Motor Finance or EY channels.
An unexpected request for personal information or payment should therefore be treated cautiously.
There is another complication for Blue customers.
Parts of the FCA's Motor Finance Compensation Scheme are currently suspended [6] while four legal challenges proceed before the Upper Tribunal.
Consumer Voice is challenging aspects of the scheme from a consumer compensation perspective [7], while Volkswagen Financial Services, Mercedes-Benz Financial Services and CA Auto Finance UK have brought separate challenges.
The Tribunal has indicated that the cases could be heard from 14 to 18 December 2026 or, depending on issues concerning evidence and disclosure, from 16 to 26 February 2027.
While the partial suspension remains in place, firms are not currently required to calculate and pay redress under the affected parts of the scheme.
The administrators therefore cannot yet know the final extent of Blue's compensation liability.
EY says it remains uncertain what impact the legal challenges could have on the scheme.
Blue's administration demonstrates why eligibility and recovery are two different issues when a lender becomes insolvent.
Someone may ultimately satisfy the FCA's criteria for car finance mis-selling and establish an eligible Blue Motor Finance claim.
That does not necessarily mean the company responsible for the agreement will have enough money to pay the calculated compensation in full.
For consumers with potential PCP claims or other historic Blue agreements, the administration does not mean those claims have disappeared. Nor does it mean Hodge has automatically taken responsibility for historic redress.
The old Blue Motor Finance Limited remains liable for relevant compensation, while EY's administrators will determine what can ultimately be paid from the company's available assets.
For now, customers with existing loans should continue making their normal repayments, while those with potential Blue Motor Finance claims should follow official updates from the administrators and the FCA.
The final amount customers recover will depend both on the outcome of the wider FCA motor finance scheme and on how much money is ultimately available through Blue Motor Finance's administration.
_________