Motor Finance Cases Set New Standards for Disclosure


The Motor Finance Commission Claims – including Johnson v FirstRand BankWrench v FirstRand Bank, and Hopcraft v Close Brothers – are a set of Court of Appeal cases addressing undisclosed or partially disclosed commission payments in motor finance agreements.

Key Points:

  1. Background:

The claimants were financially unsophisticated consumers who relied on car dealerships to arrange hire-purchase finance for second-hand cars. The dealerships acted as credit brokers, receiving commission from lenders, often without informing the consumers.

  1. Claims and Allegations:
  1. Court Findings:

The Court ruled that the dealerships breached both the “disinterested duty” and fiduciary duty by failing to disclose commissions adequately.

  1. Implications:

This ruling requires full disclosure of commissions to consumers, setting a precedent for transparency and fairness in motor finance.

The decision may lead to significant financial liabilities for lenders and brokers, potentially costing billions in repayments, similar to the PPI scandal.

This case underscores the importance of transparency in consumer finance, with dealerships and lenders now facing increased responsibility to ensure consumers are fully informed of any commission arrangements.


© 2025 Proskauer Rose LLP.
National Law Review, Volume XIV, Number 309