Mis-Sold Car Finance Claims: How to Check & Claim Compensation

You're sitting at home, scrolling through news about the car finance scandal, and suddenly you're wondering: "Could this apply to me?" That finance deal from 2016 that the dealer made seem so straightforward—was something dodgy happening behind the scenes?

Here's the uncomfortable truth: if you bought a car on finance between 2007 and 2021, there's a very good chance something *was* happening behind the scenes. And millions of UK consumers are now discovering they're entitled to compensation for it.

How Do I Know If My Car Finance Was Mis-Sold?

Let's work through this together, because the signs aren't always obvious. After all, dealers were trained to make these commission arrangements seem completely normal.

Think back to when you bought your car. I want you to really picture that day—the excitement, the dealer showing you around, the moment you started discussing finance. Now answer this honestly: at any point did the dealer sit you down and explain they'd earn more money if they gave you a higher interest rate? Did they tell you they had discretion to choose your rate from a range, and the higher they set it, the bigger their payday?

If you're thinking "definitely not," you're not alone. This is the core of the car finance mis-selling scandal.

The Hidden Commission Issue (The Big One)

Between 2007 and 2021, the motor finance industry operated under something called Discretionary Commission Arrangements—DCAs for short. Here's what this actually meant in practice:

When you walked into that dealership, the salesperson wasn't just selling you a car. They were also acting as a credit broker, arranging finance deals with lenders like Black Horse, Close Brothers, or Santander. And here's where it gets interesting: those lenders gave dealers a range of interest rates they could offer you.

Let's say the lender looked at your credit and decided they'd accept anywhere from 7% to 12% APR. The dealer could choose where in that range to place you. Choose 7%? They earn modest commission. Choose 12%? They earn substantially more. What do you think they chose?

They chose the higher rate. Almost every time. Because they were human beings with mortgages and targets, and the system incentivized them to maximize commission, not save you money.

Now, this might have been defensible if they'd been upfront about it: "Look, I can give you 7% or 12%, and I'll earn more if you take 12%. Your choice." But that conversation never happened. Instead, they came back and said "great news, you're approved at 9.9%!" As if this was the only rate available. As if they'd fought to get you the best deal.

That's mis-selling. Not because commission is inherently wrong—brokers are allowed to earn money—but because hiding the arrangement and the discretion they had prevented you from making an informed decision.

The Other Warning Signs

Hidden commission is the main issue, but it wasn't the only way car finance was mis-sold. Let me walk you through the other red flags:

Pressure tactics - Did the dealer tell you "this deal is only available today" or "I need your decision right now"? Classic pressure selling. They didn't want you going home to think about it, or checking rates with your bank, because comparison shopping would expose their inflated rate. If you felt rushed into signing documents you hadn't properly read, that's a warning sign.

Inadequate affordability checks - Think about what questions the dealer asked about your finances. Was it thorough? Did they verify your income, check your existing debts, ask about your monthly outgoings? Or was it more like "what do you earn?" followed by "you'll be fine with £350 a month"? Proper affordability assessments are detailed. If yours felt cursory, the finance might have been irresponsibly lent.

Unsuitable products - Maybe you mentioned wanting to own the car long-term, but they pushed PCP anyway (which is designed for people who want to change cars regularly). Or perhaps you were clear about your budget, but they steered you toward a more expensive car with "only slightly higher" monthly payments. If the finance product didn't actually match your expressed needs, that's mis-selling.

No alternatives discussed - Did the dealer show you multiple finance options? Did they explain you could get quotes from banks? Or did they present one offer and move straight to paperwork? Brokers should present alternatives or at least explain why they're recommending their chosen option. If yours didn't, they weren't acting in your best interest.

Interest rates that seemed high - Maybe you had decent credit but got an expensive APR. Maybe a friend with similar finances got a much better rate from a bank. If your interest rate seemed disproportionate to your credit profile, there's probably a reason: the dealer inflated it to boost commission.

What is Mis-Selling in Car Finance?

Let me break down the technical definition into plain English, because understanding what mis-selling actually means helps you assess your own situation.

Mis-selling occurs when financial products are sold inappropriately, unfairly, or without proper disclosure. In car finance, this played out in several distinct ways:

Type 1: Undisclosed Commission (The Main Scandal)

This is the big one affecting millions of consumers. The dealer acted as a middleman between you and the lender, earned commission for arranging your finance, and had discretion over your interest rate—but never explained any of this to you.

Think about any other purchase where the salesperson can adjust the price to earn bigger commission. You'd expect them to disclose that, right? "I can sell you this sofa for £1,000 to £1,500, and I earn 10% commission on whatever price I charge." That disclosure lets you make an informed decision. You might negotiate, shop around, or at least understand why they're recommending the higher price.

With car finance, that disclosure almost never happened. Dealers presented one rate as if it was the only option, when they actually had discretion to offer you something lower. The Supreme Court examined this in 2025 and ruled it constituted an "unfair relationship" under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. You were in a relationship (finance agreement) that was fundamentally unfair because you didn't have information the dealer had.

Type 2: Pressure Selling Tactics

This one's more straightforward but still surprisingly common. Dealers who used high-pressure tactics to rush you into finance decisions:

What it looked like: "This promotional rate expires today," "I've got three other people interested in this car," "I need your decision in the next hour," or simply hovering over you while you tried to read documents, making you feel uncomfortable taking time to think.

The law is clear: you have the right to make informed decisions without pressure. Finance is a major commitment—typically thousands of pounds over several years. Rushing someone into that decision because "the deal expires today" is mis-selling, plain and simple.

Many people don't realize they were pressured because the dealer was so friendly about it. But friendly pressure is still pressure. If you felt you couldn't leave without deciding, or couldn't take documents home to review, that's a problem.

Type 3: Irresponsible Lending (Affordability)

This type of mis-selling relates to whether the lender properly checked if you could afford the finance.

The FCA requires lenders to ensure finance is affordable. This doesn't just mean "can you technically make the payments?" It means: can you make the payments comfortably, without cutting into money needed for essentials, while maintaining a reasonable standard of living?

A proper affordability check involves: verifying your income (not just taking your word for it), understanding your existing financial commitments (other loans, credit cards, rent/mortgage), asking about dependents and regular expenses, and ensuring the finance leaves you with sufficient disposable income.

If your dealer asked "what do you earn?" and immediately said "you're fine then," that's not an affordability check. That's just selling you finance without properly assessing if it's responsible to do so.

Why this matters now: If you struggled to make payments from the start, if the finance was clearly unaffordable based on your circumstances, you may have grounds to claim the finance was irresponsibly lent—separate from the commission issue.

Type 4: Unsuitable Product Recommendations

This is subtler, but it's still mis-selling when it happens.

Let's say you told the dealer you wanted to own the car long-term—maybe it was for your business, or you prefer to buy rather than lease. The dealer should've recommended Hire Purchase (HP), where you own the car after the final payment. Instead, they pushed Personal Contract Purchase (PCP), which is designed for people who want flexibility to hand the car back or upgrade regularly.

Why did they push PCP when HP suited you better? Often because PCP commission structures were more lucrative for dealers, or because PCP kept you coming back every 3 years (more opportunities for repeat commission).

The product should match your needs, not maximize dealer profits. If it didn't, that's mis-selling.

Can I Claim for Mis-Sold Car Finance?

Now let's figure out if you're actually eligible to claim, because understanding the qualifying factors helps you assess your own case honestly.

The key test isn't just "did I have car finance?"—it's "was that finance sold to me fairly and with proper disclosure?" For the vast majority of finance agreements between 2007-2021, the answer is no.

The Core Eligibility Factors

You had a finance agreement between 2007-2024 - This is the crucial timeframe. DCAs were industry-standard from 2007 until banned in January 2021. The FCA has also been investigating practices up to 2024. If your agreement falls anywhere in this window, you're in scope. Even if you've finished paying, or the car is long gone, you can still claim for how the finance was sold.

A dealer arranged or recommended the finance - This is about who set up the finance. If you walked into a dealership, discussed cars, and they "sorted the finance" for you, they were acting as a credit broker. Doesn't matter if the finance paperwork said Black Horse, Santander, or Close Brothers—if the dealer arranged it, they were the broker, and they likely earned commission.

What if you can't remember exactly how it was arranged? Here's a simple test: did you apply for a loan with your own bank independently, then buy a car with that money? Or did the dealer handle the finance application? If the dealer handled it, they were the broker.

You were never properly informed about commission - Be honest about this. Were you told the dealer earned commission? Maybe—sometimes there's a vague line in documents about "we may receive a fee." But were you told they had discretion over your interest rate? Were you told they'd earn MORE by setting it HIGHER? That's the informed consent the Supreme Court said was required. For most people, this conversation never happened.

Which Finance Types Can You Claim On?

The mis-selling issues affected multiple types of car finance during this period. Let me walk through each one:

PCP (Personal Contract Purchase) was the dominant finance type from 2007-2021. Those lower monthly payments, the flexibility to hand the car back, the option to trade in for a new deal—PCP was everywhere. And hidden commission was particularly common on PCP because the complex structure made it easier to hide. If you had PCP during this period, your claim is likely strong. Learn more about PCP claims specifically.

Hire Purchase (HP) was also heavily affected. HP is more straightforward—you make fixed payments and own the car at the end—but dealers still had discretion over your interest rate through DCAs. If your dealer arranged HP finance for you, the same commission issues apply.

Personal loans arranged by dealers count too. Some dealers presented what looked like a "personal loan" but was actually arranged through them as a broker. If your dealer set up a loan with a finance company (not your own bank), it's claimable.

Conditional sale agreements are similar to HP and had the same commission structures. Less common than PCP or HP, but equally affected by the DCA scandal.

Common Situations Where Claims Succeed

Let me describe some real scenarios we see regularly. If any of these match your experience, you likely have a valid claim:

The "leave it with me" scenario - Dealer took your details, disappeared for 20 minutes, came back with finance approved. You felt grateful they sorted it so quickly. Reality: they were choosing the highest rate they could justify to maximize commission, and you had no idea this discretion existed.

The "upgrade treadmill" scenario - You handed back your PCP car after 3 years and immediately got another PCP deal. Dealer said "you're pre-approved!" What they meant: "I'm about to earn commission on your new deal the same way I did on your last one." Multiple PCP agreements mean multiple claims—compensation can really add up here.

The "I needed transport" scenario - Maybe you desperately needed a car for work. The dealer knew you were in a tight spot, knew you'd accept whatever rate they quoted. That vulnerability made you an even better target for inflated rates—and that's especially problematic from a mis-selling perspective.

The "seemed expensive but I trusted them" scenario - You thought your rate seemed high, but the dealer blamed your credit, or said "that's just what rates are right now," or explained it away somehow. You accepted it because you're not a finance expert. Turns out your credit was fine—they just chose a high rate because they could.

How Much Compensation for Mis-Sold Finance?

Let's have an honest conversation about money, because this is probably why you're reading this guide.

The FCA estimates the industry-wide average payout at approximately £700 per agreement. But I need to explain what that actually means, because that £700 figure gets thrown around a lot and it's important you understand it properly.

That's an average across millions of agreements. Some people will receive £200. Others will receive £2,000. The £700 figure doesn't mean you'll definitely get that amount—it's a statistical average that gives you a ballpark sense of scale. Your actual compensation depends entirely on your specific circumstances.

What Actually Determines Your Compensation?

Let me explain the factors that affect your payout, and more importantly, *why* they affect it:

The interest rate you paid vs. what you should have paid - This is the foundational calculation. If your dealer set you at 10.5% APR when someone with your credit profile should've got 8% APR, that 2.5% difference compounds over the agreement term. Let's do the math: on a £20,000 car finance agreement over 4 years, paying 10.5% instead of 8% costs you roughly £1,000 in extra interest. That's what you're claiming back.

But here's the tricky part: determining what rate you "should" have got. Your lender will have records of what rates they were offering for different credit profiles. If you had good credit but got a rate typically reserved for poor credit, that's evidence the dealer inflated it. The claims process involves reconstructing what a fair rate would've been.

How long you paid that inflated rate - Basic math here: if you overpaid £20/month in excess interest, and you made payments for 48 months (4 years), that's £960 total overpayment. Someone with a shorter agreement overpaid for fewer months, so their compensation is proportionally less. This is why agreement length matters—not because longer is better or worse, just because it affects the math.

The size of your finance agreement - Percentage differences have bigger impacts on larger loans. That same 2.5% inflation on a £30,000 luxury car PCP creates more excess interest than on a £10,000 used car. The principle is the same (you were overcharged), but the pound amount differs based on the finance amount.

Whether you had multiple agreements - Here's where compensation can significantly exceed that £700 average. If you had three car finance deals between 2007-2021—say, a £15,000 PCP in 2014, a £22,000 PCP in 2017, and an £18,000 PCP in 2020—you can claim on each one. Hypothetically: £650 + £900 + £800 = £2,350 total compensation across the three claims.

Plus statutory interest - Any compensation you're awarded also attracts 8% statutory interest from the date you overpaid until the date it's repaid to you. This can add 15-25% to the total compensation amount. On a £700 settlement, that's roughly another £100-150.

When Claims Are Worth More

Some consumers receive significantly above the average, and it's worth understanding why—it might apply to you:

Multiple finance agreements - As I mentioned, this is the big multiplier. Three claims instead of one can triple your compensation.

Premium vehicles - If you financed an expensive car, the larger loan amount means rate differentials have bigger impact. £2,000+ compensation on high-value vehicles isn't unusual.

Very high commission rates - Some dealers were particularly aggressive with rate inflation. If investigation reveals you were given a rate at the absolute top of the available range, compensation reflects that.

Clear evidence of mis-selling - When paperwork shows zero disclosure, or dealers made demonstrably false statements, or you have emails/messages showing pressure tactics, claims tend to settle higher because the evidence is incontrovertible.

When Claims Don't Succeed

Not every claim results in compensation, and it's important you understand why some fail:

Adequate disclosure was provided - If the lender can prove they properly disclosed the commission arrangement and your consent was genuinely informed, the claim won't succeed. This is rare for 2007-2021 agreements, but it happens.

You arranged finance independently - If you applied directly to a bank yourself (not through a dealer) and used that money to buy a car, there's no broker commission to claim. You dealt directly with the lender.

Post-2021 agreements with proper disclosure - Finance after the DCA ban (January 2021) should have proper disclosure if sold correctly. Though there may still be grounds to claim for other mis-selling issues.

0% APR deals - Genuine 0% finance (often manufacturer promotional offers) typically didn't have discretionary commission structures because there's no interest to manipulate. Though even here, other aspects might have been mis-sold.

What is Mis-Selling in Car Finance? (The Legal Definition)

Let me explain this more formally, because understanding the legal framework strengthens your confidence that this isn't some made-up claim—it's grounded in established consumer law.

Mis-selling, legally speaking, occurs when financial products are sold in ways that breach Financial Conduct Authority rules or create "unfair relationships" under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

The Supreme Court spent months examining car finance practices in 2024-2025, ultimately ruling that certain commission arrangements constituted those unfair relationships. This wasn't a minor case—this was the highest court in the UK validating that millions of consumers had legitimate grievances.

The Legal Basis for Claims

Consumer Credit Act 1974 - Sections 140A-140C give courts power to address "unfair relationships" between creditors and debtors. The Supreme Court ruled that earning commission by inflating rates without informed consent creates such unfair relationships.

FCA Principles for Businesses - The Financial Conduct Authority's Principle 6 requires firms to pay due regard to customers' interests and treat them fairly. Principle 7 requires clear, fair, and not misleading communications. Hiding discretionary commission arguably breaches both.

Common law duties - When dealers act as credit brokers, they have duties to their customers. These include disclosure of material facts (like commission arrangements) and avoiding conflicts of interest (or disclosing them if unavoidable).

This isn't frivolous litigation. This is established consumer protection law being applied to an industry practice that operated in the grey zone for years until regulators and courts finally said "this isn't acceptable."

The FCA's Perspective

The Financial Conduct Authority investigated these practices for years before taking action. They didn't rush to judgment—they studied the market, consulted industry, examined evidence, and concluded that consumer harm was widespread.

In October 2025, they published proposals for a comprehensive redress scheme, stating clearly that inadequate disclosure creates a "presumption of harm"—meaning if disclosure was poor (and for most 2007-2021 agreements, it was), you're presumed to have suffered financial loss. The burden shifts to lenders to prove otherwise.

That's a big deal. It means your claim starts from a position of "this was probably unfair" rather than you having to prove unfairness. The FCA's validation of consumer harm is powerful evidence that these claims are legitimate.

How to Make a Mis-Sold Car Finance Claim

Right, you've read this far, you're thinking "okay, I was probably mis-sold car finance—what do I actually do about it?" Let me walk you through both options, because I want you to make an informed choice.

Step 1: Gather Your Basic Information

You don't need much to start. Seriously—many people don't claim because they think "I've lost all my paperwork." You don't need it. Here's what actually helps:

Essential information:

• What car did you have? (Make, model, or registration number)
• Roughly when did you get the finance? (2016? 2019? Year is fine)
• Who was the finance company? (If you remember—we can find out if not)
• How did you arrange it? (Through dealer or independently?)

That's genuinely it. Everything else—your original finance agreement, commission records, payment history—the lender has all of that on file. They're required to keep records for years. We request it from them as part of the claims process.

Step 2: Choose Your Route

You've got two legitimate options here, and I'm going to lay out both fairly:

Claim yourself (completely free) - You can write directly to your lender at zero cost. This is your absolute right under UK consumer law. Compose a formal letter explaining you're claiming for undisclosed commission arrangements, reference DCAs and the Supreme Court ruling, request details of any commission paid to the dealer, and ask for compensation under unfair relationship provisions.

The lender has 8 weeks to investigate and respond. They'll either uphold your claim (and offer compensation), reject it (with reasons), or make a partial offer. If you're unhappy with the outcome, you can escalate to the Financial Ombudsman Service for free.

Pros of claiming yourself: You keep 100% of any compensation. Total control over the process. No fees whatsoever.

Cons: You handle all correspondence and paperwork. You need to know what evidence lenders require. You negotiate settlement amounts yourself. If rejected, you navigate the Ombudsman process alone. Time-consuming and requires persistence.

Use a claims management company (no win, no fee) - Companies like us handle everything professionally. Our solicitor partners specialize in these claims, know exactly what each lender needs, and negotiate from experience.

Pros: Zero hassle for you. Expert handling increases success chances. Professional negotiation often results in higher settlements. We deal with rejections and Ombudsman escalations. You only pay if we win (30% + VAT), and you pay nothing if we don't recover compensation.

Cons: Our fee means you keep 70% rather than 100%. You're trusting us to handle it (though you can always ask for updates). If you're the type who prefers doing things yourself, you might find it frustrating not being in control.

Neither route is wrong. It depends on your circumstances, your confidence navigating financial complaints, and whether you value time saved over fee saved.

Step 3: The Claim Gets Assessed

Regardless of which route you choose, here's what happens behind the scenes:

The lender pulls your agreement from their records. They'll have everything: your original application, the rate you were offered, records of what commission was paid to the dealer, any disclosure documents you signed.

They'll examine what you were told about commission. If their records show clear, explicit disclosure that the dealer had discretion over your rate and would earn more by setting it higher, your claim might fail. But here's reality: for most 2007-2021 agreements, disclosure was inadequate at best, non-existent at worst.

They'll calculate your overpayment. What rate should you have got? What rate did you actually get? What's the financial difference over your agreement term? This becomes your base compensation amount.

They'll make a decision. Uphold fully (you get the calculated amount), uphold partially (they offer less, usually with justification), or reject (they believe disclosure was adequate or no financial loss occurred).

Step 4: If Your Claim Is Rejected

This is where many people give up, assuming rejection means they were wrong. Don't. Lenders reject claims for various reasons, and many of those rejections get overturned by the Financial Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman route is free and powerful. They're independent of lenders, they'll review all evidence with fresh eyes, and their decisions are binding on the lender (though you're free to reject their decision if you disagree).

The Ombudsman process takes 6-9 months typically, but it often succeeds where direct claims failed. Why? Because the Ombudsman applies consumer protection law strictly, they're not influenced by lender profit concerns, and they have the power to make lenders pay.

If you're using our service and your claim is rejected, we handle the Ombudsman escalation as part of our service (no additional fee). If you're claiming yourself, you can contact the Ombudsman directly after receiving a final response from your lender.

Step 5: Receiving Your Compensation

When your claim succeeds, compensation is paid by the lender—either directly to you (if claiming yourself) or to your claims management company (who then deduct their fee and forward your portion).

Payment typically arrives within 4-6 weeks of settlement being agreed. The lender processes it through their finance department, runs compliance checks, then issues payment. If there are delays beyond 6 weeks, chase them—sometimes payments get stuck in admin queues.

If you're with us: We receive the payment, deduct our 30% + VAT fee, and send you your 70% portion. You'll receive a clear breakdown showing the total compensation, our fee calculation, and your net amount. Everything transparent.

Timeline for Mis-Sold Car Finance Claims

Let me give you realistic timelines based on industry data. Not best-case scenarios, not worst-case—typical timelines so you can set proper expectations.

Standard Timeline: Claiming Directly (3-4 Months)

Month 1: You research your claim, gather basic information, write to your lender. They acknowledge receipt and open an investigation. Behind the scenes, they're pulling your agreement records, checking commission arrangements, and calculating potential overpayments.

Month 2: Lender completes their assessment. The FCA requires them to respond within 8 weeks, and most hit that deadline. You receive their decision: uphold (with offer amount), reject (with reasons), or partial uphold.

Month 3: If upheld, you either accept the offer or negotiate if you think it's too low. Once agreed, the lender processes payment. If rejected, you decide whether to escalate to the Financial Ombudsman or accept the decision.

Month 4: Payment arrives, or Ombudsman case gets set up if you're escalating.

Total typical timeline: 12-16 weeks for straightforward cases that succeed at lender level.

Via Claims Management Company (4-5 Months)

Month 1: We check your eligibility, gather information, and request any missing documents from lenders. We prepare a comprehensive, professionally-argued claim and submit it with all relevant legal citations and evidence.

Months 2-3: Lender assessment period (same 8 weeks as DIY claims). We chase them if they're slow, provide any additional information they request, and maintain pressure for timely response.

Month 4: Negotiation phase. If they offer £600 and we believe you're owed £900, we push back with justification. Our solicitor partners know what's reasonable vs what's lowballing.

Month 5: Settlement processed, payment received, your portion forwarded to you.

Total typical timeline: 16-20 weeks with professional handling.

Financial Ombudsman Route (6-12 Months)

Months 1-2: Initial claim to lender, gets rejected.

Month 3: You (or we) submit case to Financial Ombudsman. They send you an acknowledgment and assign an adjudicator.

Months 4-5: Ombudsman requests information from both parties. They'll want your full history, lender's records, any correspondence, evidence of disclosure (or lack thereof).

Months 6-9: Investigation period. The Ombudsman reviews everything, may ask follow-up questions, and formulates their view on whether mis-selling occurred and what compensation is appropriate.

Months 10-12: Decision issued. If in your favor, lender has to pay (binding decision). If against you, you can accept it or reject and go to court (though courts are expensive and most people accept Ombudsman decisions as final).

Total timeline: 6-12 months, but with independent assessment and binding outcome.

The FCA Redress Scheme (From May 2026)

The FCA scheme launching in May changes timelines somewhat. Under the scheme, lenders will be required to proactively process claims systematically, potentially speeding things up. They'll have to follow standardized assessment methodologies and meet FCA-mandated timelines.

But here's the key point about timing: don't wait for the scheme. Claims submitted now will be assessed under the scheme once it launches. You're not creating a separate claim that gets invalidated—you're getting in early, ensuring you're in the system, and you'll benefit from the scheme's standardized process when it begins.

Think of it like joining a queue before the queue gets massive. May 2026 arrives, systematic processing begins, and you're already in position. People who wait until May 2026 to start claiming will be behind you in line.

The FCA Redress Scheme & Mis-Selling

In October 2025, the FCA published their proposals for the motor finance redress scheme. Let me explain what this actually means for your mis-sold car finance claim, because there's been a lot of confusion and some misleading information floating around.

What the Scheme Actually Does

The FCA looked at the car finance industry, saw millions of potential claims, recognized that lenders were all handling them differently, and decided to impose a systematic, standardized framework. Think of it like the FCA stepping in as referee and saying "right, here are the rules everyone has to follow."

The "presumption of harm" principle - This is the most significant part for consumers. The FCA proposal states that if disclosure of commission arrangements was inadequate (and let's be honest, for most 2007-2021 agreements, it was inadequate at best), there's a presumption you suffered financial loss.

What does this mean practically? The lender can't just say "we disclosed adequately" without proving it. They need to show clear, documented evidence that you were told about discretionary commission arrangements and gave informed consent. For most claims, they can't produce this evidence because it doesn't exist.

Standardized calculation methodology - Currently, different lenders calculate compensation differently. Some are generous, others are stingy. The FCA scheme mandates consistent methodology across all lenders. If you had Black Horse PCP and your neighbor had Santander PCP with similar circumstances, you should get similar compensation. The scheme creates fairness through consistency.

Systematic processing obligations - Rather than handling claims ad-hoc as they arrive, lenders will be required to systematically identify affected customers, process claims efficiently, and meet clear timelines. Think of it like PPI reclaim processing, but with better rules from the outset because the FCA learned from that chaos.

Timeline: When It All Happens

May 2026 - The redress scheme formally launches. Lenders must begin systematic processing of motor finance claims under the new framework.

Mid-2026 onwards - Lenders work through their backlog of claims (including yours if you've already submitted) plus new claims as they arrive. The FCA will oversee this process, ensuring lenders comply.

2026-2027 - Mass claims processing period. This will likely take 12-24 months for all lenders to work through all eligible claims systematically.

Should You Wait or Claim Now?

I've been asked this question hundreds of times since the scheme was announced: "Should I just wait until May 2026?"

My advice: Claim now. Here's my reasoning:

Claims submitted before the scheme launches don't get thrown out—they get processed under the scheme once it begins. You're not creating two separate claims (one now, one later). You're submitting your claim early, which means you're in the system when systematic processing begins. You're at the front of the queue.

The scheme isn't a separate claims portal that opens in May 2026. It's a framework for assessing claims that already exist and new ones that arrive. Submit now = you're already in that framework when it activates.

Plus, there's always the risk of deadlines being imposed. If the FCA eventually says "claims must be submitted by [date]," you want to already be submitted, not scrambling at the last minute.

Making Your Claim: What Happens Next

You've read this guide, you understand the issue, you think you were mis-sold car finance. Now you're probably wondering: "What's the very next action I need to take?"

Let me make this simple and clear:

If You Want to Check Eligibility (No Commitment)

The absolute first step—whether you claim yourself or use our service—is determining if you're actually eligible. There's no point starting a claims process if you don't meet the basic criteria.

For our free eligibility check:

We ask you basic questions (takes about 2 minutes):

• When roughly did you get your car finance?
• What type of finance was it (PCP, HP, loan)?
• Who was the finance company (if you remember)?
• Did a dealer arrange it or did you sort it independently?

We'll tell you immediately:

• Whether you're in the right timeframe
• If your lender used DCAs during that period
• Whether your claim is likely strong, moderate, or weak
• Realistic compensation range based on similar cases (not guaranteed, but informed estimate)

No pressure, no obligation, no cost. If you're not eligible, we'll tell you honestly and explain why. If you are eligible but want to claim yourself for free, we'll respect that decision. Our goal at this stage is just to give you accurate information.

Our No Win, No Fee Service Explained

If you check eligibility and decide you want professional handling, here's exactly what we do:

We verify everything - Request your full finance agreement from the lender, pull commission records, review disclosure documents, and build a complete picture of your case.

We prepare your claim professionally - Draft a comprehensive claim letter citing relevant law (Consumer Credit Act 1974, Supreme Court precedent, FCA guidance), present evidence of inadequate disclosure, calculate your overpayment, and submit to your lender.

We handle all correspondence - When lenders respond (or don't respond on time), we deal with it. You're not chasing them for updates, not decoding their legal jargon, not spending hours on hold. We translate everything into plain English for you.

We negotiate for maximum compensation - If they offer £500 and we think you're owed £900, we push back with justification. Our solicitor partners know what's reasonable and fight for the top end of what's justifiable for your case.

We escalate if necessary - If your lender rejects your claim, we don't accept that as final. We escalate to the Financial Ombudsman Service, present your case to them, and argue for why you're entitled to compensation.

You pay nothing unless we win - Our fee is 30% + VAT of compensation recovered, and that fee only applies if we successfully get you money. If we don't recover anything, you owe us nothing. We absorb that risk entirely.

Why People Choose Professional Handling

It's not for everyone, but here's why many people opt for claims management companies:

Time saved - The claims process involves multiple rounds of correspondence, following up on deadlines, interpreting lender responses, calculating what you're owed. That's hours of work spread over months. Many people value their time more than the 30% fee.

Expertise - We know what makes claims succeed because we've submitted thousands. We know which evidence strengthens your case, which arguments resonate with lenders, when to negotiate vs when to escalate. Experience matters when money is at stake.

Stress removed - Some people find the idea of battling a large financial institution stressful. They'd rather pay a fee to have someone experienced handle it while they focus on work, family, life.

Better outcomes - Professional negotiation, proper evidence presentation, and knowledge of similar case outcomes often results in higher settlements than consumers achieve themselves. Even after our 30% fee, you might end up with more money than you'd have negotiated alone.

But again: this is your choice. We're not saying you can't claim yourself. You absolutely can, and thousands do successfully. We're just explaining why people choose professional help.

Related Resources

Continue learning about car finance claims:

• PCP Claims: Complete Guide - Specific deep dive into Personal Contract Purchase claims
• Understanding DCAs - How Discretionary Commission Arrangements worked and why they were banned
• Car Finance Claims Guide - Comprehensive overview of all claim types
• FCA Redress Scheme 2026 - What the systematic scheme means for your claim
• Black Horse Finance Claims - Lender-specific guidance if your finance was with Black Horse
• Close Brothers Motor Finance Claims - Named in the Supreme Court case

Understanding our services:

• No Win, No Fee Policy - Complete explanation of how our service works
• Our Fee Structure - Full transparency on costs

---

The mis-selling of car finance was systematic and widespread.

If you had car finance between 2007-2021, the chances are good that commission arrangements weren't properly disclosed to you. That's not your fault—it was industry-standard practice that regulators eventually recognized as unfair.

You're not being greedy by checking if you're owed compensation. You're exercising legitimate consumer rights that the Supreme Court and FCA have validated. The question isn't "am I entitled to this?"—the question is "how much am I entitled to?" And there's only one way to find out: check your eligibility.