Andrew Wrench is a resident of Trentham, Stoke-on-Trent. He was one of the three claimants in the recent Supreme Court case that dealt with hidden commissions in car finance contracts. On Friday, he felt that disappointment on his own as he was reduced to one of two claimants losing their cases against finance firms. Wrench told reporters he was “disappointed” by the court’s ruling, which overturns previous rulings that had sided with Wrench.
For Wrench’s case, the focus was a single commission payment. Even so, he had discovered it “hidden away” in his contract two years prior. In fact, he called these backdoor commissions “treacherous,” insisting that provider finance companies need to be upfront about these payments. Wrench stated, “Firms should be more upfront about the payments,” emphasizing the importance of honesty in financial agreements.
After two and a half years of fighting for justice, Wrench was understandably “deflated” by the Supreme Court’s ruling. Though disappointed by this ruling, he is still thankful that he decided to sue the firms. He thought at first that the judges would see the logic of his case. Yet, when the final verdict came in, he was disheartened.
In his response to BBC Radio Stoke, Wrench went even further, explicitly calling for car finance companies to be held accountable. He urged them to contact individual consumers directly, apologize, and offer compensation. He’s clear that companies — and employees — have a responsibility to make right what’s gone wrong through the backdoor hidden commissions built into contracts.
This case has the potential to turn the car finance industry on its head. It raises some important questions about transparency and consumer rights that we need to address. As a result, consumers frequently miss non-obvious hidden fees buried in their contracts. This state of affairs merits greater transparency and oversight in the use of taxpayer dollars.
