The proposed motor finance redress scheme arrives at a time when banks’ asset finance and motor lending operations are under intense scrutiny, but are also far better prepared than they were a decade ago.
Years of investment in controls, governance and remediation capability mean many lenders will enter this programme with good foundations, clear lines of accountability and sophisticated technology. The challenge is not intent, but execution: delivering fair, accurate and defensible outcomes at unprecedented scale.
Managed well, the scheme provides an opportunity for asset finance operations to demonstrate transparency, consistency and customer care under heightened regulatory standards. Managed poorly and there is a risk of raising outdated narratives in an environment far less forgiving.
A tougher road for motor and asset finance operations
Experience with the Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) redress scheme left banks with playbooks, enhanced controls, and, crucially, tested and proven remediation systems. In theory, then, the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) proposed motor finance redress scheme should be easily manageable.
As usual, reality is more complex, particularly for leasing and motor finance portfolios.
A higher evidential bar
Under Consumer Duty, firms must show their workings, including complete data lineage, real-time audit trails, documented rationale for every step, and demonstrable fairness for vulnerable customers.
Standards were slightly looser during PPI; assumptions were accepted. Today, they pose both regulatory and personal risk for senior managers.
More fragmentation, more inconsistency
PPI data sat largely within bank systems; motor and asset finance data rarely do. Records are spread across origination platforms, dealer systems, brokers, third-party administrators and legacy loan books. Reconstructing a reliable evidential record is often a programme in itself.
Liability is multi-factor, not binary
Redress depends on commission structures, dealer conduct, negotiation history, APR changes, mid-term events and settlement points. Each variable affects the outcome — and each must be supported by evidence.
A tighter regulatory timeline
Up to 14.8 million agreements may need to be reviewed within a compressed timeframe. The FCA will expect both pace and precision.
Customers expect more
Letters and call centres, acceptable during PPI, no longer meet expectations. Customers now expect digital journeys, proactive communication, real-time updates and instant verification. Failures here drive complaints and escalation.
Reputational exposure is higher
With motor finance a sensitive media topic, any misstep will be quickly amplified. Under these circumstances, it’s very possible that reputational costs may exceed the financial impact.
The best response: what “good” looks like
Asset finance operations that move to digital, automated and evidence-first remediation models early will be best placed to meet, and exceed, regulatory expectations.
Defensible compliance in 2026 looks like this:
- Diagnostics that identify in-scope agreements, map data lineage and prioritise risk
- Digital consent journeys that reduce friction and claims-management company interference
- AI-driven data extraction across dealer files, PDFs, scanned documents and legacy systems
- Rules-based calculation engines that provide consistent, auditable outcomes at scale
- Mapped pathways that will ensure the vulnerable receive appropriate support under Consumer Duty
- Dynamic dashboards providing visibility of progress, controls and potential risks
Where NTT DATA helps asset finance teams win
NTT DATA offers a motor-finance-specific redress model designed for the UK’s regulatory, data and operational realities. Built to meet FCA expectations, it blends industrial-scale operations with advanced automation to help lenders deliver defensible outcomes at pace.
NTT DATA combines people, process and technology in a single modular stack:
- AI-powered Intelligent Document Processing and Digital Completion Platform – Automates the extraction, classification and validation of fragmented motor finance documentation
- End-to-end workflow automation – Orchestrates diagnostics, liability checks, fraud screening, calculation, communication, settlement and FCA reporting
- Rules-based liability and redress calculation engines – Ensures consistent, audit-ready outcomes across millions of agreements
- Embedded Experian fraud and identity verification – Reduces exposure to claims-management company exploitation and false positives
- Vulnerability-aware pathways – Ensures appropriate handling in line with Consumer Duty
- Industrial-scale business process services capability – Blends automation with skilled teams to manage exceptions and quality assurance at scale
- Full evidential packs and audit trails – Every decision is traceable, with clear lineage and senior manager oversight
The result is assurance, scalability and defensibility, characteristics needed by asset finance operations under scrutiny.
Redress as a test of modern compliance maturity
The motor finance redress scheme will distinguish between firms that merely comply and those that have taken a leadership position. Those that embrace automation, analytics and strong governance will deliver fair outcomes quickly and strengthen trust in the process. Those that rely on legacy methods risk operational strain, Consumer Duty breaches and reputational damage.
This is an opportunity for asset finance teams to show that they are progressive and that modern remediation can be both rigorous and fair.