Following the handing down of the Supreme Court's judgment on Hopcraft, Johnson and Wrench, which allowed the defendants’ appeals in Hopcraft and Wrench and allowed an appeal on Johnson but ordered that the claimant receive compensation, Matthew Maxwell Scott, Executive Director of the Association of Consumer Support Organisations, many of whose members help people make claims, said:
"This judgment provided relief for some but confusion for others. It is essential that the FCA now works quickly to explain the impact of this ruling on consumers, and especially those like Mr Johnson who paid excessive commissions.
"In the weeks ahead we will see what the regulator proposes by way of a redress scheme, and above all how accessible it is for consumers. The more that can claim without needing help, the better, but many will choose professional representation and that is equally valid.
"As with the PPI scandal, there will be attempts to make this story about claims management companies and lawyers, when it is the finance firms who have misbehaved.
"Claims management firms in particular are much-more rigidly regulated than they were in the days of PPI and law firms face a very similar level of red tape from the SRA. As long as they stick to the rules, and make it clear that it's possible to make a claim without a CMC or lawyer, then their role in supporting some consumers to get their money back should not be a cause of concern.
"Reports that the government might have looked to introduce retrospective legislation to reduce the banks' exposure were troubling but should now be irrelevant.
"It was the FCA itself which banned discretionary commission arrangements, so it would have been a retrograde step if the authorities stepped in for such cases and prevented the banks paying back money they should never have had in the first place."
The full judgment can be read here.