Two years ago, a case against credit card firm Mastercard for imposing excessive card transaction charges was thrown out of the Competition Appeal Tribunal. However, in April this year the Court of Appeal decided that the Competition Appeal Tribunal must reconsider that decision. As a result, the credit card issuer could be forced to pay every UK adult £300. But how has the case come about and how can you ensure you’re entitled to the refund?
The origins of the case
The case against Mastercard was brought by former financial ombudsman Walter Merricks. He believes that in the 16 years to 2008, the credit card charges that Mastercard was applying to businesses meant that consumers were paying more for purchases than they should have. These ‘interchange fees’ were essentially transaction fees that Merricks says Mastercard profited from unnecessarily. The case alleges that these charges were a breach of competition law by Mastercard, based on a 2007 ruling by the European Commission that said the same. Merricks believes that anyone who was an adult in the UK during this time should be entitled to compensation as a result – even if they did not have a Mastercard!
Who might be eligible for a refund?
Merricks’ case creates a huge class action that could amount to a £14 billion liability for Mastercard if he ultimately wins. There are two key requirements for consumers to be eligible for the refund if the case is successful:
You must have been over the age of 16 in 1992
You must have been resident in the UK for three months or more between 1992 and 2008
There could be around 46 million people in the UK who would become entitled to this windfall if the case does go to trial and Mastercard loses. And because the action is about charges applied to any business transaction, not just those relating to Mastercard’s credit card customers, anyone who purchased anything during that time could have been affected.
Why did the case fail first time around?
The original case was brought by Merricks in the Competition Appeal Tribunal. The Tribunal ruled that the case could not continue to trial because it could not establish how the fees that were charged by Mastercard had been passed on to customers. It said that it was not possible to identify how retailers had absorbed the costs and so it would not be possible to work out what losses had been suffered individually. However, the Court of Appeal has now ruled that this was not a basis for stopping the case from going to trial. It effectively said that the Tribunal applied the wrong legal test when trying to determine whether the case should go ahead and progress to the courts. The Court of Appeal judges said that the original Tribunal ‘demanded too much’ information about how the fees Mastercard charged on transactions were said to have been ‘passed on’ to consumers and that it misdirected itself in terms of how any damages could be divided between those potentially entitled to them.
What do the parties involved say?
Mastercard is clearly not happy with the decision and has said that it will fight it all the way to the Supreme Court. Merricks – and anyone potentially affected in the UK – is obviously much happier that the case has been sent back to the Tribunal for review. The former financial ombudsman said he was “very pleased” with the way that the Court of Appeal had ruled.
What happens now?
The case will go back to the Competition Appeal Tribunal where it will have to decide whether it should go to trial. Only if the case against Mastercard goes to trial – and is successful – will there be an entitlement to the £300 payout that Merricks has predicted for UK consumers. If the claim does go ahead it will be the biggest class action in British history. It is the first mass consumer claim to have progressed under the new collective action system that was introduced by the Consumer Rights Act. The total cost to the card issuer is going to be somewhere in the region of £14 billion so it’s likely that Mastercard will fight the case as hard as it can to avoid that kind of liability.
Although the case could now potentially go ahead, it will be up to the Competition Appeal Tribunal to assess whether there is any basis for this mass consumer claim against Mastercard to go to trial.
Amanda Gillam is Solution Loans's General Manager and has been since 2009. She is also a prolific writer on personal finance issues, and has been quoted numerous times in articles published on 3rd party websites and in press releases. Her...Read about Amanda Gillam
We use cookies to make your experience on our site even better. They also help us to understand how you use our site. By clicking 'Accept All' you're agreeing to our use of cookies. You can change your cookie preferences by choosing 'Manage Settings' and if you want to know more, you can read our cookie policy.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.