header-logo header-logo

Right to redress for bank customers?

176259
Banks have new duties to protect consumers —so why can’t consumers sue for breach, ask Michael Brown & Harriet Campbell
  • Considers the new duties on banks, the apparent policy shift away from the private right of action, and looks at the potential consequences for both consumers and financial institutions.

Fairness to consumers and the integrity of the financial markets underpin the new duties being imposed on financial institutions in 2024. But is it fair that a consumer can only seek redress for breach from an ombudsman and not the court? And why can’t consumers have a private right of action for breach of these duties when such a right exists for breaches of other Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) rules?

The Consumer Duty & the reimbursement rules

The Consumer Duty came into force for most financial products in July 2023, and by July 2024 will be fully in force. The duty is intended to promote fairness and is ‘outcomes-based’. But if the outcome is not what the consumer wants (or the duty is breached), the consumer

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll