33,000 Complaints, One Reckless CMC – and Now, a Landmark High Court Ruling

Can a Claims Management Company (CMC) be held liable for swamping a lender with tens of thousands of meritless complaints?

A recent ruling from the High Court suggests the answer is yes.

In a potentially defining moment for financial services, the High Court of Justice (King’s Bench Division) has refused to strike out a legal claim brought by Vanquis Bank against The Money Solicitor (TMS), a CMC that submitted over 33,000 affordability complaints – many of which, it is alleged, were unarguable and submitted without proper checks or client-by-client review.

This is not just a technical legal decision. It could represent a fundamental shift in how firms respond to speculative, volume-driven complaints, particularly in the consumer credit and motor finance sectors.

Vanquis Bank v TMS Legal Ltd [2025] EWHC 1599 (KB)

The ruling, handed down on 25 June 2025, permits Vanquis to pursue a claim for damages under the tort of causing loss by unlawful means – a rarely invoked legal avenue in the context of complaint handling.

Mr Justice Jay acknowledged that while the case raises novel issues, the allegations, if proven, could constitute “egregious conduct” on the part of the CMC. The Court found there was sufficient cause for the matter to proceed to trial.

Why this judgment is significant

• It opens the door for lenders to seek damages from CMCs, rather than relying solely on complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) or intervention from regulators

• CMCs may now face financial and legal consequences for submitting high volumes of complaints without sufficient merit

• The Court has recognised that recklessly handled mass complaints can cause genuine economic harm

  
  

Beyond Vanquis: An industry-wide warning

While this case relates to a single lender, the wider implications are already being felt across the industry.

With rising complaint volumes linked to motor finance commissions, affordability concerns, and increased activity from both CMCs and SRA-regulated firms, lenders are facing significant operational strain.

Firms are reporting:

• Large-scale complaint submissions based on templated formats

• Increases in DSAR activity tied to speculative claims

• Complaints that appear to lack proper due diligence or client understanding

  
  

The Vanquis ruling may mark the start of a broader shift – where firms are no longer passive recipients of complaints, but active challengers of mass, unmeritorious submissions.

Looking ahead

This judgment may encourage more financial institutions to explore legal avenues in response to aggressive complaint generation models. It also raises the stakes for firms engaging in high-volume activity without robust internal controls or evidence standards.

With further legal and regulatory developments expected in the months ahead – particularly in motor finance – this case sets a clear precedent: volume does not excuse recklessness, and complaint handling must be grounded in merit, not momentum.

Let’s talk about how you protect your firm — and take back control.