This afternoon, Britain’s highest court will deliver a bombshell ruling that could rock the financial system and blow a £44billion hole in the banking sector. The Supreme Court is set to decide whether millions of car finance deals were allegedly mis-sold thanks to shady “secret commission” payments between lenders and dealers. Rachel Reeves will be hanging on its verdict.
These kickbacks, often hidden from buyers, are said to have given dealers an incentive to jack up interest rates to line their own pockets. The case hinges on whether these deals broke consumer protection laws. The Court of Appeal ruled they did, but lenders appealed. Now it’s up to the Supreme Court to have the final say. If it agrees, a compensation tsunami could follow.
Cases cover the last decade. Estimates for the total cost range from £30billion to £44billion, potentially rivalling the infamous £50billion PPI scandal.
This isn’t just about motors. If the Supreme Court takes a broader view, it could hit any hire-purchase deal involving undisclosed commissions, from sofas and laptops to fridges and beds.
Banks are bracing for impact. High street bank Lloyds has already put aside £1.2billion, Close Brothers £165million, Santander £295million. These sums may be nowhere near enough.
Consumer campaigner Martin Lewis warned of a full-blown reckoning for the credit industry, saying it could “shake the foundations” of consumer lending
A separate Financial Conduct Authority probe into “discretionary commission agreements”, banned in 2021, is still to come.
So where does Rachel Reeves come in?
The Chancellor is said to be scrambling behind the scenes to prevent a second PPI-style scandal on her watch.
She’s warned the fallout could torpedo the reputation of UK financial services, and make car finance harder and more expensive for working families.
In January, the Treasury wrote to judges urging them to avoid handing out “windfall” compensation, arguing that it could “cause considerable economic harm”.
In an extraordinary move, Reeves even tried to intervene in the court case itself but judges rejected her argument.
That’s rare, and raises serious questions. Should a Chancellor be leaning on judges to head off a redress scheme?
Critics say it smacks of overreach. Or worse, a stitch-up to protect the banks.
If she blocks payouts, she’ll be accused of siding with big finance over ripped-off consumers. With up to 23million people potentially affected, that’s a political nightmare waiting to happen.
Lords Reed, Hodge, Lloyd-Jones, Briggs and Hamblen will publish their verdict at 4.35pm. Five minutes after the stock market closes.
That’s really unusual, and suggests the judges know this could rattle investors. Lloyds Banking Group, heavily exposed through its Black Horse motor arm, is right in the firing line.
Reeves is now caught in a trap. She’s promised to restore trust in Britain’s institutions but any attempt to override the courts risks torching trust in her government instead.
A ruling that slams secret commissions could blow apart a swathe of UK consumer lending practices. Banks may tighten credit. Borrowers could face higher costs. New and used car sales could plunge. Barclays has warned it could make the UK less investable, and stifle growth.
PPI payouts hurt banks but they also gave households a cash boost. Not to mention the economy, as they spent their windfalls. This time, the damage may outweigh the economic benefits.
Some warn the Chancellor could even try to change the law to dodge the fallout, a nuclear option that would spark uproar.
But consumer advocates say millions were misled and deserve justice. The stakes couldn’t be higher. The verdict lands in hours. Reeves is on tenterhooks. Watch this space.
