Key facts
- The FCA accuses Consumer Voice and Courmacs Legal of a "want of candour" in their challenge to the £9bn motor finance scheme.
- The FCA alleges the firms failed to disclose their funding and potential conflicts of interest.
- Consumer Voice argues the FCA scheme will result in low payouts for victims.
- Courmacs Legal provides pro bono services but stands to earn up to 30% of client settlements.
- Alex Neill, co-founder of Consumer Voice, denies the FCA's accusations.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is seeking to have Consumer Voice and Courmacs Legal, the firms leading a challenge to the regulator's £9bn motor finance redress scheme, dismissed from court. The FCA alleges that both firms have demonstrated a "want of candour" by failing to fully and frankly explain their funding, business models, and potential conflicts of interest.
Consumer Voice, founded by former Which? staffers, argues that the FCA's scheme will result in low payouts for consumers who were overcharged due to 'secret' commission arrangements between 2007 and 2024. The group contends the FCA is prioritizing lenders' concerns about large bills over consumer protection. The FCA, however, suggests that Consumer Voice and Courmacs Legal have commercial incentives that may not align with consumers' best interests, pointing to Courmacs' pro bono representation and its previous work with Consumer Voice.
Major financial institutions like Lloyds Banking Group and Barclays have set aside billions for potential compensation payouts. The FCA has suspended parts of its redress scheme pending the legal challenge, which could extend until February 2027. Alex Neill, a co-founder of Consumer Voice, has called the FCA's allegations "disgraceful" and "untrue," questioning why the regulator would attack the only consumer-led challenge to the scheme.