The Financial Conduct Authority has published findings from its review of firms’ motor finance redress implementation plans, including examples of good and poor practice. Most firms understood the scheme’s requirements, but many plans lacked enough operational detail for the FCA to assess whether firms could deliver fair, consistent and timely outcomes. Although the scheme is partially suspended, firms must continue to comply with all rules that are not suspended. Firms need to substantiate how they will identify the affected population, manage data gaps and third-party dependencies, and operate workflows at scale. Decision-making frameworks should distinguish automated processes from human judgment, document group-based methodologies and exceptions, and maintain audit trails and quality assurance. Plans should also show how liability decisions lead to validated redress calculations, consumer communications and controlled payments, including fraud, identity and duplicate-payment checks, while addressing cases involving multiple representatives. Firms should review the examples and remedy gaps in their plans, controls and oversight, keeping their named motor finance supervisors informed of material developments. The FCA will continue engaging with firms where concerns remain and may provide individual feedback or request further evidence of readiness.
2026-08-11Financial Conduct Authority
UK Financial Conduct Authority identifies delivery gaps and outlines good practice for motor finance redress plans
The Financial Conduct Authority found that many motor finance redress plans remained too high level to demonstrate operational readiness, despite firms generally understanding the scheme’s requirements. Firms should strengthen population identification, workflows, decision controls, redress calculations, quality assurance and oversight of third parties and multiple representatives. The FCA may seek further detail from firms whose plans do not show sufficient readiness.