1. Introduction
Three claims by individuals against motor finance lenders have recently been upheld by the Court of Appeal which decided that they should receive refunds of commission payments that the lenders had made to the car dealers who were acting as intermediaries/ brokers in respect of the finance arrangements (interest was also awarded to one claimant). This decision, known as the Hopcraft case, may have wider implications for situations in which:
a. an intermediary owes a duty to the customer to be disinterested or to act in the best interests of the customer (in other words, a ‘disinterested’ or ‘fiduciary’ duty is owed);
b. the intermediary receives a benefit from the product provider (such as a commission payment) which represents a self-interest and which conflicts with the intermediary’s ability to discharge this duty; and
c. the intermediary and/or the product provider has not taken sufficient steps to make the customer aware of the commission and/or has not o
…