The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has urged the Upper Tribunal to strike out the FCA motor finance challenge brought by Courmacs Legal and Consumer Voice, accusing both of a serious ‘want of candour’ over their commercial motives. The FCA filed legal documents alleging the pair ‘failed to give a full and frank explanation’ of their activities and financial incentives in the redress scheme.
The regulator said the delay its scheme might suffer through the challenge could be designed to ‘channel more cases through Consumer Voice to [Courmacs Legal]’, in a move ‘generating remuneration for both’.
Consumer Voice co-founder Alex Neill rejected the accusations, telling City AM they were ‘disgraceful’ and ‘untrue’. Neill said Consumer Voice had previously been invited to join the FCA’s redress design panel. ‘That raises serious questions about why the FCA has chosen to attack the only legal challenge brought on behalf of consumers,’ he said. Courmacs Legal directed City AM to Consumer Voice’s response.
What the FCA’s Redress Scheme Covers
The confirmed redress scheme, published as FCA policy statement PS26/3, sets expected firm payouts at £7.5 billion. The original snippet cited £9 billion, a figure from an earlier stage of the process; the FCA’s own confirmed document gives £7.5 billion as the expected payout total.
The scheme covers motor finance agreements sold between 6 April 2007 and 1 November 2024 where commission was payable by the lender to the broker. FCA consultation paper CP25/27 records that approximately 32.5 million motor finance agreements were sold between April 2007 and October 2024.
Under the PS26/3 policy statement, 12.1 million agreements are eligible for redress, reduced from 14.2 million at the consultation stage. Consumers in those deals stand to receive an average payout of £830. In around one in three cases, compensation will be capped to ensure consumers are not put back in a better position than had they been treated fairly.
Top City banks carry the largest provisions. Lloyds Banking Group has set aside £2 billion and Barclays £325 million. The scheme also faces separate challenges from the financial services arms of three vehicle manufacturers, which argue, contrary to Consumer Voice, that the scheme goes too far.
The Guardian reported in April 2026 that Consumer Voice notified the FCA it considered the scheme inadequate. PA Media reported the group filed its challenge specifically to alter the way compensation is calculated, seeking billions more for motorists.
The FCA Motor Finance Challenge Hearings and Broader Regulatory Campaign
The FCA suspended parts of its scheme earlier this month ahead of the tribunal proceedings. According to the FCA’s own announcement, hearing windows are set for 14–18 December 2026 or 16–26 February 2027.
The regulatory campaign around motor finance claims now spans four bodies. The FCA, working with the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), has used powers under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and, for the first time, under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 to require nine law firms to hand over information on their exit fees. The Information Commissioner’s Office and the Advertising Standards Authority are also involved, targeting misleading advertising and excessive client fees.
The FCA’s joint enforcement action sits alongside a £1 million advertising campaign warning consumers they do not need a claims management company or law firm to seek compensation and that engaging one will reduce any payout they receive.
Since January 2024, the FCA’s proactive monitoring of financial promotions has led to the removal or amendment of more than 800 misleading adverts by FCA-regulated claims management companies, according to a joint FCA-SRA warning. The SRA declined to comment on the FCA’s specific accusations against Courmacs Legal and Consumer Voice.
The tribunal’s December 2026 hearing window is the first fixed date at which the FCA’s scheme could be tested in court; the outcome will determine whether the £7.5 billion redress process proceeds on its current terms or must be redesigned.
