The Financial Conduct Authority says it will answer Consumer Voice and Courmacs Legal in court filings over an alleged dispute concerning a £9.1bn motor-finance compensation scheme. Guardian Business reports that Consumer Voice co-founder Alex Neill remains confident in the group’s legal case, which it says is being brought for consumers affected by the redress plan. Consumer Voice is seeking larger payments for drivers who were overcharged through commission arrangements involving car dealerships between 2007 and 2024. The group says the proposed scheme would provide average compensation of £830 for each mis-sold loan and would favour lenders over consumers.
Consumer Voice was founded by Nikki Stopford and Alex Neill in 2023, and is the only challenger arguing that motorists should receive more money. The Financial Conduct Authority has sought to have Consumer Voice’s case dismissed, questioning the organisation’s funding, commercial arrangements and possible conflicts of interest. The regulator has also raised the group’s relationship with Courmacs Legal, which it says previously hired Consumer Voice for consumer research. Consumer Voice says it works with law firms to help people recover money from companies accused of breaking rules, while its website says it earns money from communications work and commissions linked to legal cases. Courmacs Legal says it is acting without charge in the case, although the firm can receive up to 30% of client settlements.
The dispute centres on a Microsoft Teams discussion involving Nikhil Rathi, the Financial Conduct Authority’s chief executive, and directors of Consumer Voice. Court documents allege that Rathi warned the group of possible consequences if it challenged the proposed settlement before the legal deadline. The filings portray the warning as meaning that future cooperation between the regulator and Consumer Voice could suffer if the group proceeded with its case. They also allege that Rathi described the challenge as the scheme’s biggest danger and said plans to distribute compensation by Christmas would fail if the directors continued.
The documents say the Financial Conduct Authority had previously regarded Consumer Voice as a trusted consumer organisation, but later adopted a more critical stance after the group decided to litigate. They further allege that the regulator did not disclose during the discussion that three specialist lenders were also preparing challenges. Those specialist lenders, along with Consumer Voice, are contesting the scheme at the UK’s upper tribunal, though their arguments differ. The compensation plan followed the wider controversy over mis-sold UK car loans and an intervention by Rachel Reeves after lobbying from major banks.
The Financial Conduct Authority disputes Consumer Voice’s account of the discussion and says officials had spoken with lenders, claims firms and other parties before the deadline. The regulator says it explained the effects on consumers, defended the scheme as the strongest route to payment and warned that expected compensation could be delayed. It also says staff continued discussions with Consumer Voice after the call, including about settlement offers outside the formal scheme. The Financial Conduct Authority says it did not learn about the specialist lenders’ challenges until after the discussion.
Alex Neill said Consumer Voice remained determined and confident in its challenge on behalf of consumers it believes are receiving too little under the plan.