))
How Kevin Durkin Took Johnson v First Rand to the Court of Appeal and Won
Manage episode 447728508 series 3609735
Indhold leveret af Sentinel Legal. Alt podcastindhold inklusive episoder, grafik og podcastbeskrivelser uploades og leveres direkte af Sentinel Legal eller deres podcastplatformspartner. Hvis du mener, at nogen bruger dit ophavsretligt beskyttede værk uden din tilladelse, kan du følge processen beskrevet her https://da.player.fm/legal.
Exploring the Landmark Court of Appeal Judgment on Car Finance Commissions | Sentinel Legal and HD Law
In this episode, Sam Ward of Sentinel Legal and Kevin Durkin from HD Law delve into the landmark Court of Appeal judgement in Johnson v First Rand, a ruling set to reshape the UK car finance landscape. This decision uncovered hidden car finance commissions that allowed dealerships to profit by inflating consumer interest rates, often without disclosure. We explore the judgement’s consumer impact, the nuances of fiduciary duty, and steps to file car finance mis-selling claims.
If you’re interested in consumer rights or want insight into the Court of Appeal’s stance on car finance commissions, this episode is essential listening.
⏱️ Detailed Timestamps:
- 00:00 - Podcast Introduction & Setting the Stage
- 01:32 - Case Introduction & Initial Reactions
- 03:06 - Johnson v First Rand Background & County Court Loss
- 03:56 - County Court Challenges in Car Finance Commissions
- 06:22 - Impact Beyond Motor Finance
- 07:06 - Underhanded Tactics by Lenders
- 10:35 - Mr. Johnson’s Journey & Financing Process
- 12:31 - Consumer Assumptions about Dealer Impartiality
- 14:26 - Johnson’s Additional Loan & Commission Impact
- 16:19 - 70% Commissions: Parallels with PPI Scandal
- 18:47 - Concealment Tactics by Lenders
- 22:46 - Discretionary Commission Models & Consumer Costs
- 23:22 - Transparency Issues in Car Finance Commissions
- 25:09 - Dealers as Finance Brokers
- 29:18 - Fiduciary Duty vs. Unfair Relationship
- 30:16 - Court’s Critique on Lender Conduct
- 33:45 - Dealer Terms of Business & Conflicts of Interest
- 36:50 - Judgment Language: “Selfish and Dishonest”
- 39:58 - Consumer Clarity & Court Guidance
- 41:16 - Court Q&A: Addressing Common Challenges
- 45:29 - Judgment on Terms & Commission Disclosure
- 53:14 - Challenges with Dealer Transparency
- 58:56 - FCA’s Role in Industry Reforms
- 1:04:39 - Supreme Court Appeal & Marketing Implications
- 1:08:10 - Binding Nature of Court of Appeal Decision
- 1:13:32 - Volume of Pending Cases & Court Availability
- 1:15:12 - Impact of Statutory Interest on Payouts
🔹 Key Topics Covered in This Podcast 🔹
Understanding Johnson v First Rand’s Impact on Car Finance Commissions
This Court of Appeal judgement condemned hidden commission practices, revealing how dealerships benefitted from raising consumer interest rates. This decision labelled these tactics as “selfish and dishonest,” allowing consumers to pursue car finance compensation claims for undisclosed fees.
Hidden Commissions and Consumer Rights in Car Finance
The ruling exposed how dealers profit more from finance commissions than from vehicle sales, making transparency critical for consumer protection. This case sets a precedent for pursuing car finance mis-selling compensation.
Statutory Interest and Compensation Growth
Delayed payouts now include statutory interest, significantly increasing compensation values. With the FCA’s delayed redress, accrued interest could mean higher payouts, intensifying financial pressures on lenders.
The Duty of Care in Car Finance Agreements
The Court emphasised fiduciary duty, pushing lenders to act in consumers' best interests. This new standard challenges lenders to ensure full disclosure in car finance commission structures.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
ADR offers a faster, cost-effective path forward, helping consumers avoid lengthy trials while enabling quicker redress for mis-sold finance agreements.
6 episoder
Del
