Member Info for BasherSmith

HtTps://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/consumer/car-finance-scandal-payments-face-big-delay-due-legal-challenges

To issue yesterday's statement the FCA must have come under pressure from somewhere. I think it's probably a combination of legal advice and Treasury concern, who see £8b of bank profits going out of the window without their ability to tax it. Do the Treasury want eight billion pounds going to the great unwashed, or would they rather have £320,000,000,000 in tax. I'll give you three guesses

This is the exact opposite of what Chid and Bird song have been saying, so it's guaranteed to be right!

HTtps://www.cityam.com/motor-finance-compensation-scheme-hanging-by-a-thread-amid-legal-row/

"We have not yet made any decisions on what we would do under various scenarios. However, if the scheme, or parts of it, were quashed, (OF COURSE IT WILL BE!) we would need to carefully consider all options, taking account of all relevant matters. That would include whether to proceed with a revised scheme. This would likely require further consultation, and any resulting rules or guidance could face further lengthy challenge.

It is therefore now prudent for us to supervise all lenders against a central planning assumption that under that scenario there would be no scheme. Lenders need, therefore, to be operationally and financially ready for a complaint-led and supervisory approach to resolve historic liabilities."

Bye, Bye redress scheme!

" It's gone very quiet the last couple of days Sir."

" Yes Sergeant, I don't like it, it's too quiet. Those FCA devils are plotting something."

Jperryuk many thanks.

Interesting that Volkswagen are challenging the whole scheme (quantum ) and not just the tied (captive) part if I understand it right . Could it be that they see that the only way they can get a substantial reduction in penalties is to undermine the whole scheme. I certainly hope so!

I would like to think that scheme 1 from 2007 to 2014 is likely dead in the water because even the FCA don't seem to have much faith in it . If so I wonder how much CBG would save in compensation? Even if the number of agreements is lower than for 2014 to 2021, the interest payment will be larger because of the increased time. CBG might be saving £100 to £150 million which would be very significant. with only 150m shares in issue. We live in hope!

The ticking time bomb at the heart of the FCA scheme.

htTps://www.linkedin.com/posts/andy-smith-mba-2a49494_this-car-finance-compensation-scheme-may-activity-7446830283565375488-gGaF

Here's what's going to happen:

*Lawyers will advise the FCA not to go to court as they have a very thin case.

*The scheme will be pulled and the French,  Germans and the lawyers blamed.  Who cares about them?

*The FCA will say it has proved impossible to produce a scheme which satisfies everybody. 

*Instead the FCA will say we are defining exactly what an unfair relationship will look like.  If in the light of that anyone thinks they have been treated badly and have suffered harm they are welcome to use the courts If they can't get satisfaction from the lender..

CBG will liberate £200m from the assigned funds and give us all a £1.00 a share special dividend.

Am I sure?  No of course not. I  have no more idea than anybody else what's going to happen,  but I'm starting to think,  for the first time, that  something like this is not beyond the realms of possibility.

"An industry-wide scheme is the fastest, simplest route for consumers and the most efficient way for firms to put things right and give certainty to their investors."

Put what right? So called unfair behaviour that they complacently watched for seven years without doing anything about it?

Is this going to be their defence when they are accused of acting illegally and going further than their powers allow? Good luck with that!

HtTps://www.stephensonharwood.com/insights/the-fca-s-proposed-motor-finance-redress-scheme/

It was published on the 6th April, but worth a re-read. Also John Swift KC on why the FCA have exceeded their legal powers. This is before the VW high powered lawyers really get to work. MR Rathi's scheme is in trouble I think and it will take more than a few concessions to call off the dogs.

I seem to remember that CBG were said to have paid £4m last August in legal fees. Peanuts when you consider what VW are facing. I imagine they will hire the best talent they can and go all out to kill the scheme in its present form, taking it to appeal if necessary. We'll see.

I personally think that the scheme is a house built on sand and won't survive a sustained legal attack. Again we'll see.

"A Volkswagen spokesman said it had “identified issues that require independent clarification” and so had decided to take the FCA to court. “Our referral is focused on ensuring the redress scheme is applied accurately and fairly,” they added. Analysts have said the carmaker could face a bill of approximately £1.5bn for the scheme." Daily Telegraph.

No wonder they are challenging!

Martin Lewis thinks that the third Challenger may be Credit Agricole.

The FCA has said that it will respond to the latest challenges later this week (Thursday Friday?).

Unt now ve vill see vot ve vill see!

Martin Lewis on Birmingham live:

*consumer voice might win and the lenders could appeal.

*consumer voice could lose and appeal.

*the FCA might eventually give up, abandon the scheme and say that borrowers have to pursue their own claims. ( i wonder if he got a hint from his bestie Rathi?)

What an unholy mess!

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://help.ft.com/faq/gifting-and-sharing-an-article/what-is-a-gift-article/.

https://www.ft.com/content/a2e9cd62-3e0c-4600-9f1

Just what we don't need, 6 - 12 months uncertainty if the Higher Tribunal accept the case. Perhaps they won't.

"Its (CV)challenge, which is being brought on a pro bono basis by law firm Courmacs Legal, could delay compensation payments to millions of consumers if it is accepted by London’s Upper Tribunal. It would be the first time an FCA redress scheme has been challenged in court."

FT

Surely if the lenders had gone to court, the matter would have been declared "sub judice" and payments would not have been.

What's the difference if the challenge is from the other direction?

From the Consumer Voice web site this morning.

"Today,(27th April) Consumer Voice has applied to challenge the scheme to ensure compensation is fair and properly reflects what people lost.

Major banks, including Lloyds Banking Group, Santander and Barclays, along with the Finance and Leasing Association, have confirmed they will not challenge the scheme, saying they favour “timely compensation for consumers”. That could say a lot about who this scheme works best for."

Apparently Courmacs are acting on a Pro Bono basis for Consumer Voice.