LONDON — A proposed multibillion-pound car finance compensation scheme in the United Kingdom is facing legal questions over whether regulators have the authority to apply rules retroactively, as millions of potential car finance claims and PCP claims move closer to possible payouts 2026.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) car finance review targets what it describes as widespread mis-sold car finance and undisclosed commission arrangements, but critics argue the scope of the plan could exceed the regulator’s statutory powers.

Overview of the car finance compensation scheme

The program would cover agreements dating from April 2007 through November 2024, potentially affecting millions of car finance claims and PCP finance claims linked to the ongoing car finance scandal.

The FCA said the effort aims to address harm caused by car finance mis-selling, particularly where borrowers were not informed about commission structures that may have influenced loan terms. Consumers could be eligible for a car finance refund or PCP refund if wrongdoing is confirmed.

Estimates suggest the scheme could result in billions of pounds in car finance compensation, making it one of the largest consumer redress efforts in the UK financial sector.

Legal concerns over regulatory authority

Legal analyst John Swift, a barrister, said part of the FCA car finance plan may be unlawful because it applies to a period before the regulator had authority over consumer credit [1].

Consumer credit regulation in the United Kingdom was overseen by a different body until 2014, when responsibility transferred to the FCA. Swift argued that applying current standards to earlier agreements could amount to retrospective rulemaking affecting historic car finance claims.

“The regulator appears to be creating obligations after the fact and applying them to conduct that was not subject to its supervision at the time,” Swift wrote.

Division of the scheme

The FCA has divided the proposal into two periods, agreements made before April 2014 and those made afterward [2].

While post-2014 agreements fall within FCA oversight, earlier cases tied to car finance mis-selling and mis-sold PCP car finance claims have drawn the most scrutiny due to questions about legal authority.

Broader criticism and potential impact

Swift also questioned whether the FCA’s use of the Financial Services and Markets Act can support a scheme covering activity that was not regulated at the time.

Critics say the scale of potential compensation and refunds under the FCA car finance scheme could have significant financial implications for lenders, especially as large volumes of car finance claims and PCP claims continue to emerge with many more people doing a car finance refund check to know their eligibility.

Outlook for payouts and legal challenges

The FCA said the scheme is designed to ensure fair outcomes for consumers affected by the car finance scandal and to restore confidence in the market.

However, the regulator has not indicated changes to its approach despite legal concerns. The issue may ultimately be decided in court if firms challenge the plan, which could affect the timeline and structure of payouts 2026 for eligible consumers.

The outcome could shape how future car finance claims and broader financial compensation schemes are handled in the UK.

__________

References:

1. Legal analyst John Swift, a barrister, said part of the FCA car finance plan may be unlawful because it applies to a period before the regulator had authority over consumer credit - https://www.thetimes.com/business/companies-markets/article/john-swift-regulator-car-finance-compensation-fca-lawful-k23npg7xt
2. The FCA has divided the proposal into two periods, agreements made before April 2014 and those made afterward - https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/policy/ps26-3.pdf