Member Info for BasherSmith

I would like to propose a toast:

Here's to Mr Rathi, who presides over all,

Here's to the BOD's, who scatter cash to all,

Here's to the feckless consumer, who collects all,

Here's to the shareholder, who pays for all.

I'm really interested to see if the consumer voice scheme goes ahead today.

"The major car finance mis-selling redress scheme, confirmed by the financial regulator last month, is now facing a legal challenge over claims that it will leave drivers "out of pocket". The group behind the case says the scheme could still launch while the level of redress is reviewed, but this remains to be seen." Martin Lewis.

* If it were to succeed would that mean that it's back to the drawing board for the FCA?

* Since the lenders would be financially hit were it to succeed, would they be entitled to have legal representation?

* Would an appeal to the High Court stop the payments dead?

At this stage I doubt if any of us know.

I think Knot may be right. The fat lady may not have sung yet.

FLA reverse course

hTtps://news.sky.com/story/mark-kleinman-blog-see-the-latest-stories-from-sky-news-city-editor-13475361?postid=11586216#liveblog-body

If the scheme is modified or toned down it must apply to everybody.

John Swift KC and the House of Lords committee both implied that the scheme is illegal and that the FCA have gone beyond the limit of their legal powers. I would think that some smart silks could tear the scheme to ribbons. I do hope so and look forward to seeing it.

From Google AI

Key Aspects of the FLA Challenge:

Broad Liability: The FLA believes the FCA's tests for compensation are too blunt and do not accurately target consumers who suffered genuine loss.

Market Impact: The trade body is concerned that excessive payouts, estimated to cost lenders significantly, could reduce credit availability for future consumers.

Legal Challenges: The FLA is among several parties, including lenders and potential claimant groups, scrutinising the, for potential legal action.

Alternative Proposals: The FLA has recommended alternative methodologies to, as mentioned in their news section, ensure a fairer and more efficiently implemented scheme.

Finance & Leasing Association

Two more sleeps before we know for sure. Close Brothers Motor Finance is a full member of the FLA as you might expect. Many thanks for posting John.

Madrugada

Sounds like a foreigner Johnny to me. They come over here in those rubber boats, stealing our women and taking our jobs and criticising our popcorn .......................................... the boogers!

Birdsong is back and the Bird's the Word.

htTps://youtu.be/Q6qlGhONoXg?si=Yu2bgQpeHErK6OJd

One director buys ....................OK

Two directors buy ....................that's a coincidence!

Three directors buy ............... that's strange, why now? Why not when it was £2 or £3 a share

Four directors bu y................. WTF is going on? What do they know that I don't?

Plus the American parent who has 4.95% FMR LLC

FMR LLC, known as Fidelity Investments, is a massive American multinational financial services corporation headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts. Founded in 1946, it serves individual/institutional investors globally with services including asset management, brokerage, and retirement planning. It is one of the world's largest asset managers, managing over $10 trillion in assets."

According to Mr John Swift KC the FCA were acting beyond the limits of their legal powers when they proposed this scheme. Why not just try to get the whole damn thing chucked out, as it goes beyond the supreme court judgement ? To my mind the lenders were adhering to the legal requirements at the time and I don't see what they have done wrong in most cases, or why these levels of compensation need to be paid to so many people. If they have caused harm, lied to a loan applicant or charged extremely high rates of interest or commission then OK they should pay up, but that isn't the majority of the cases as far as I can see. Perhaps I'm missing something!

They should finance the FLA to take action on their behalf, thus avoiding any negative PR in my opinion.

Big write up on Interactive Investor this morning, noting the insider purchases and quoting the UBS estimate of £5.55 per share. Rating CBG as a five-star buy.

Should have said. source ADVFN holders.

Holders

Institutions

91.06%

Insiders

0.14%

Public and Others

8.80%

Where would 100m shares come from? 8.8% is about 13m shares. Buy from the Institutions? Would they Sell?

" Good news comes quickly on an express train. Bad news limps in late on leaden feet." Stock Market saying.

FFS, where is the RNS?

Something I missed, but I can't determine the importance. Perhaps someone cleverer than I can. It's a car dealer talking after the Supreme Court ruling on a site called " the logbook" .

Copy and paste the following into YouTube. Watch from 5:40 on:

WHY IS NOBODY TALKING ABOUT THIS SHOCKING FACT - CAR FINANCE - Supreme Court

Lloyds announcement should put Mike Morgan under pressure to state that no more provisions are needed, which is very likely in my opinion. As soon as he does the company can be properly valued and will be in play IMO, because it is a raving bargain at £4.10. A bid is probably the best option for us to get a realistic return for our investment in the short to medium term. But who T. F. knows at the moment!

Even without a bid, and even with all the uncertainty, this share has the potential to go to £7.00 plus eventually. So selling at £3.60 if you don't have to doesn't seem to me like a brilliant idea. Basher is going to hold.

"Selling at a low price is no remedy for having failed to sell at a high price." Warren Buffet.

HtTps://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/27/lloyds-bank-66m-court-car-loan-law-fca

I presume CBG won't be immune from this, and if so all I can see is 12 months argy-bargy in the courts.

Lloyds faces £66mn car-finance lawsuit from 30,000 consumers

copy and paste that into Google it worked for me.