Am I owed compensation for mis-sold car finance?

Where the scheme stands

The Financial Conduct Authority confirmed an industry-wide motor finance redress scheme in Policy Statement PS26/3 on 30 March 2026. It covers agreements entered into between 6 April 2007 and 1 November 2024 where commission arrangements were historically undisclosed or unfair.

On 1 and 2 July 2026 the Upper Tribunal partially suspended the scheme. The practical effect of that suspension, while it stands, is narrow and specific:

• Lenders are not required to calculate redress.
• Lenders are not required to pay redress.
• Lenders are not required to send compensation communications.

The Tribunal hearing is listed for 14 to 18 December 2026 or 16 to 26 February 2027. The Financial Conduct Authority has said payments are not expected before 2027.

So the answer to the question in the heading of this page is not available to anyone today, including the lender. That is the position as at 9 September 2026 and it is live litigation, so it can change. The Financial Conduct Authority publishes the current position itself, and that is the source to check rather than any page, including this one.

What the scheme covers

The scheme is about how motor finance was sold — specifically, commission arrangements between lenders and the brokers and dealers who introduced the business, where those arrangements were not disclosed or were unfair. It is not about the condition, mileage or description of the car.

The Financial Conduct Authority estimated that around 12.1 million agreements fall within the 6 April 2007 to 1 November 2024 window.

Two other published figures are quoted widely and are routinely misread. The regulator’s estimate of about £830 is an average across the whole scheme, used together with an assumed claim rate of 75% to size a total cost of roughly £7.5 billion. Both are modelling of the scheme in aggregate. Neither is a per-person figure, neither is an entitlement, and neither can be applied to an individual agreement. Any calculator that multiplies your agreement by an average is producing a guess, not an assessment.

For context on the products involved, the Financial Conduct Authority’s own published dataset puts PCP at over half of motor finance agreements and most common for new cars, at an average APR of around 5%, with hire purchase the most common product for used vehicles at an average APR of around 12% and a used-segment weighted average of 13%. Those are averages across the regulator’s dataset, not a rate anyone was charged or is entitled to, and they say nothing about whether a particular agreement falls within the scheme.

Who assesses an individual case

The lender named on the finance agreement. Under the scheme as confirmed, it is the lender that applies the criteria to its own historical agreements and reaches a determination. A dealer did not run the scheme, and a marketplace has no visibility of anyone’s finance agreement at all. Autoza is not a party to any finance agreement and cannot assess, register or progress a claim.

If you do not know which firm holds the agreement, the credit agreement itself names it, and the Financial Conduct Authority Register records which firms are authorised and their status. A complaint about a regulated credit agreement, or about the firm that provided it, goes to that firm first; the Financial Ombudsman Service is the statutory scheme that considers such complaints afterwards. How the ombudsman route interacts with the redress scheme while the suspension stands is a matter for the Financial Conduct Authority’s own current guidance rather than for this page.

The dates that are still running

The suspension did not stop everything. Two dates continue to apply, and it is worth being precise about what they are, because they are obligations on firms rather than deadlines for a consumer to act.

• 18 November 2026. Firms must respond by this date to complainants who are not owed compensation, on agreements from April 2014 onwards.
• 18 January 2027. The same obligation, on agreements earlier than that.

A determination that no compensation is owed can therefore still arrive during the suspension. A payment cannot, because calculating and paying redress is the part that is suspended.

What the regulator has said about claims management companies

The Financial Conduct Authority has said there is no need to use a claims management company, and that using one could cost over 30% of any payout. Complaining directly to the lender named on the agreement is free.

One consequence of the suspension follows from the facts above rather than from any opinion: while lenders are not required to calculate or pay redress, any statement that money is payable now is not correct.

Matters this is often confused with

Three separate things get folded into the same question. They have different legal bases, different decision-makers and different timescales.

• A fault with the car. That is the Consumer Rights Act 2015: a 30-day short-term right to reject, and a presumption that a fault appearing within six months of delivery was present at delivery. Note that section 24(10) of that Act makes motor vehicles an exception to the usual bar on deducting for use inside the first six months.
• Section 75. Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 attaches to a cash price of more than £100 and no more than £30,000, and does not reach dealer-arranged hire purchase or PCP, because the finance company is itself the supplier.
• Voluntary termination. A separate statutory right under sections 99 and 100 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to end a regulated hire purchase or PCP agreement early. It is about ending an agreement you hold now, not about how it was sold.

Where these rules apply

The Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and Financial Conduct Authority regulation are United Kingdom-wide. Nothing on this page is limited to Great Britain in the way an MOT fee, the first-MOT age or a clean air zone is, and the redress scheme reaches agreements sold in Northern Ireland on the same terms as those sold in England, Scotland and Wales. What differs between those jurisdictions is the court and procedure that would apply if a dispute ever got that far.

Where to check the current position

Two places, in this order: the lender named on your finance agreement, which is the firm that assesses eligibility and holds the records; and fca.org.uk, which publishes the scheme documents and the current consumer position. Because this is live litigation, a date on any third-party page — including the 9 September 2026 date on this one — tells you when it was checked, not that it is still current.