Mansion left 'gutted' by works to be restored
Harrow Council's planning committee has approved plans for the complete restoration of The Rookery, a Georgian mansion house and stables in Stanmore.
It was originally built for the owner of the adjacent Clutterbuck Brewery – Lord Clutterbuck – and remained in the same family for several generations.
In recent years a series of "unlawful works" were carried out, the committee was told, including using décor described as "fake old" and removing original plaster from the walls, which had done "harm to the listed building".
A new owner of The Rookery took possession of the site in 2022. Listed Building Consent, required to make changes to a listed building, was not obtained before work began.
The refurbishment was halted by conservationists and enforcement in December that year, and has ceased ever since, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.
Consent has now been granted for internal and external alterations to take place, including a full interior "strip out" – much of which has already taken place – and renewal of the decoration.
The plans outline how the building will be restored to "match the historic details" and "recreate the historic features" where genuine, according to Harrow Council's planning officer.
The Rookery was described as of particular historic and architectural importance due to its age and association with the brewery, as well as its traditional architectural features and historic fabric.
The planning officer said the restoration work would provide a "unique opportunity" to find out more information about the significance and historic development of the building as the modern surface fabric is removed.
Asked if the building could be restored to its original state, the planning officer said it was "the best proposal [in] the moment we are at".
No enforcement action was served when the works were discovered because officers sought "to get a better understanding of what had happened", but prosecution was still be an option, according to the committee chair Marilyn Ashton.
She described the application as "a positive" in respect of moving things forward but called the building's current condition "a big disappointment" and that "accepting what's happened and being pragmatic doesn't make it all right".
"Having studied the report very clearly, one might infer that we have still got the option of prosecution because it is actually quite a serious problem to do this to a Grade II listed building. It isn't just one room or just a small feature, the whole place has literally been gutted."
She added there was "not much left of its historical value but hopefully we can put some of it back to make it look at least something like how it was".
Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk
Harrow Council
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Popular dessert business applies for licence to open until 3am
A POPULAR Bradford takeaway dessert business has applied for a licence to open until 3am. Brownie Pointss on Mount Street specialises in products like ice creams, luxury brownies, and iced teas. Despite its unassuming location in a mainly industrial area of the city, Brownie Pointss has proved hugely popular, and videos of the desserts on offer have been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on social media platforms like TikTok. The business has applied to Bradford Council for a licence to serve late-night refreshments until 3am. Its current opening hours are listed online as 11am to midnight on Sunday to Thursday and 11am to 1am on Fridays and Saturdays. A decision on the licence will be made later this summer.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Spain's wealth tax became an unexpected boon for Britain
Amancio Ortega, Spain's richest man, is not a household name on Teesside. But the billionaire entrepreneur, best known for founding Zara, now looms large over the area. The 89-year-old's €110bn (£95bn) family office, Pontegadea Inversiones, last week snapped up a 49pc stake in PD Ports, paying an undisclosed sum to Canadian investment giant Brookfield for the shares. PD operates major ports at Tees and Hartlepool. The Spaniard already has a property portfolio in Britain worth £2.5bn, but until now he has mostly stuck to hotels, shops and offices. The PD Ports deal is his first major British foray into infrastructure and logistics. Ortega's family office insists the investment is simply about good business. But observers note that the push into ports could have an advantageous side effect: lowering the billionaire's wealth tax bill. Spain's notorious wealth tax was first introduced in 1977 as an 'emergency' measure, and was reintroduced in 2011 after a three-year hiatus as a 'temporary' measure. It takes an annual slice of between 0.2pc and 3.5pc of the value of every Spanish resident's worldwide assets. The rules say that a Spaniard's combined tax bill on wealth and income should not exceed 60pc of their taxable income. That shifts the tax net away from the asset-rich-cash-poor, old-money crowd and more towards the high-earning end of the wealth spectrum – where Ortega stands out. Ortega's personal fortune, which Forbes estimates at almost $115bn (£86bn), largely derives from his 59pc shareholding in his company Inditex, which owns the Zara brand he founded 50 years ago. After leaving school at 14, he began working for a clothes shop in Galicia and started his first rag-trade business in the early 1960s. However, it is not just a paper fortune: he also regularly receives billions in dividends, a form of income, from his empire. This year, his dividend bonanza will top €3bn for the first time thanks to his stake in Inditex, which is held via two of Pontegadea's three subsidiary companies. He tends to reinvest almost all of this in buying properties and companies. Most of Ortega's British investments are in scope of Spain's wealth tax. However, the rules say that if a rich Spaniard has a stake worth more than 5pc in a productive or trading business (which does not include real estate), that won't count towards his or her taxable wealth. PD Ports is exactly this kind of investment. Sources close to Pontegadea say most of the family office's assets would still get caught in the wealth tax net. They say it is standard practice to redeploy the dividends and other income into economically productive assets. Still, Pontegadea has been visibly broadening its portfolio away from purely property in recent years, taking the kind of 5pc-plus stakes in energy and infrastructure companies that, if structured in certain ways, could qualify for that wealth tax exemption. Sources said some of these investments might qualify the exemption and lower the wealth tax liability. But they said this was not the motivation for the choice of assets, nor the timing of deals. Ortega's strategic shift has mostly been aimed at energy. In 2023, the year after a reform that tightened the wealth tax net, Pontegadea pumped a reported €693m into energy projects, more than twice the amount of the year before. In the past five years his family office has acquired 5pc stakes in both electricity major Redeia and gas grid operator Enagas. Among its dozen-plus energy investments, it also owns 12pc of Portuguese electricity and gas system operator Ren, and has stakes in several solar and wind farms in Spain and France. Beyond energy, in 2022 Pontegadea bought a one-third stake in telecoms provider Telxius, and last December it took a 20pc chunk of Dutch parking operator Q-Park. The 49pc stake in PD Ports looks to be one of Ortega's largest ownership positions, putting Britain at the centre of Pontegadea's diversification strategy. The investment highlights how Britain is benefiting from a deal-making spree overseen by Spain's richest man. It could also be read as a sign of the distorting effects of a wealth tax, which critics say can often do more harm than good. 'I don't think this tax collects a lot of revenue,' says Christopher McCann, a Spain-based senior partner at financial advisers Blevins Franks. Calls for UK wealth tax It comes as Rachel Reeves comes under pressure to consider just such a wealth tax for Britain to help fill a multibillion-pound hole in the budget. Lord Kinnock, the former Labour leader, has called for a 2pc tax on assets over £10m and the party's union backers have also spoken out in favour of the idea. Anneliese Dodds, a former shadow chancellor, last week also urged Sir Keir Starmer and Reeves to look at 'how it would be possible' to impose a levy on the assets of the richest Britons. On Friday, Dame Diana Johnson, the policing minister, said on Friday it was important 'all these issues are looked at and discussed and we look at the evidence about what will work and what won't work'. Despite the growing calls, senior ministers have downplayed talks of a wealth tax amid concerns it would hasten the stampede of wealthy leaving Britain after the abolition of non-dom status. Depending on the structure of any regime, it could also put off investors like Ortega. The businessman is a little-known but significant presence in the British property sector. His flagship is the imposing neoclassical Adelphi building on Victoria Embankment in central London, which he bought for a reported €680m. Pontegadea's other London assets include the 1920s commercial edifice Devonshire House, opposite the Ritz on Piccadilly; the roof-gardened Post Building in Bloomsbury; and a former BBC office near Oxford Circus. In Companies House filings, Pontegadea valued its British portfolio at £2.4bn in March 2024, yielding rental income of £98m. His worldwide real estate empire, worth a reported €20bn, spans Spain, Portugal, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Ireland, Britain, Canada and the United States. Ortega is a landlord to the likes of Amazon, Walmart and Primark. Although Pontegadea denies the wealth tax has played the driving role in Ortega's shift from pure property into energy and infrastructure, advisers say the tax figures are large in the financial planning of even moderately wealthy Spanish residents. 'If you have investment income, then by using the right structures you can squeeze down your taxable income, and you can reduce your wealth tax liability,' McCann says. 'It is possible to live here and pay a more reasonable level of tax just by good planning.' Whatever the motivation behind Ortega's PD Ports play, you can be sure he has plenty of good financial planning. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Millions of drivers denied compensation by Supreme Court car finance ruling
Millions of drivers will miss out on tens of billions in compensation after Britain's highest court rejected claims drivers were mis-sold car loans. The Supreme Court on Friday rejected arguments that customers should have been informed about 'secret' commissions paid to car salesmen when they arranged loans to fund vehicle purchases. Judges overturned earlier rulings that had claimed payments from banks amounted to 'bribes' and salesmen had a 'fiduciary duty' to look out for customers. The Supreme Court decision is a major boost for Rachel Reeves, who had feared that a mass compensation scheme would undermine UK growth. Analysts had estimated the cost of redress schemes for banks could have reached £44bn, putting it on a par with the PPI scandal that cost £50bn. The Chancellor was preparing to push through new laws to protect banks in the event that the Supreme Court ruled against them. A Treasury source said this intervention was now no longer necessary. A Treasury spokesman said: 'We respect this judgment from the Supreme Court and we will now work with regulators and industry to understand the impact for both firms and consumers.' The Supreme Court did not hand banks and salesmen a total victory. It upheld one case that argued a car loan had been 'unfair'. However, experts said this judgment was based on the unique circumstances of one particular case. Nicola Pangbourne, a partner at Kennedys law firm, said drivers should be 'very pessimistic' about getting any compensation. 'The court ruled there was an unfair relationship in one case but that was very fact-specific. It's not going to be the same for everybody,' she said. Drivers may still be in line for some compensation from a separate investigation into the car finance market by the City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). However, Friday's ruling effectively shields lenders including Lloyds, Barclays and Santander from a wave of claims that they would have struggled to defend. Gary Greenwood, an analyst at Shore Capital, said: 'The worst case scenario is off the table for the banks.' Bank share prices are expected to rise in London when markets open Monday morning. Two million people use car finance loans each year and around eight in ten vehicles sold in Britain are purchased using borrowed money. It is common practice for car salesmen to be paid a commission or a flat fee when arranging a loan for a vehicle purchase. Customers are not always informed how much salesmen are paid under these arrangements. A lower court decision last year ruled that dealers should inform customers about the rate of commissions. This judgment triggered chaos in the car market, amid fears that the way it worked had become illegal overnight. On Friday, Lord Reed, president of the Supreme Court, said that because car dealers were motivated by commercial factors they could not be held liable for failing to disclose commission payments. Reversing the lower court decision, he said the payments could not be classed as 'bribes'. The Finance and Leasing Association, the UK's main trade group which represents dozens of lenders, called it an 'excellent outcome'. Stephen Haddrill, director general, said the decision 'restored certainty and clarity' to the market. 'Cars are an essential part of UK life – and for many people, relying on a car means relying on motor finance,' he said. The FCA, which regulates the sector, is investigating another type of bonus commission, known as a discretionary commission arrangement, which was paid to dealers if they convinced customers to take on more expensive car loans. The regulator said it planned to lay out details of a compensation scheme for drivers who were sold this type of loan on Monday. The Supreme Court disclosed its verdict at 4:35pm on Friday, shortly after the London stock market closed, avoiding significant swings in share prices as investors digested the ruling. 07:18 PM BST Signing off... Thanks for joining us here. That's all for this blog but you can read our article on whether you could you still get compensation here. 07:01 PM BST Motorists warned to 'sit tight' and avoid claims firms Motorists are being urged to 'sit tight' and avoid signing up to potentially costly claims management firms. Paul Barker, editor of Auto Express, said: 'Today's Supreme Court ruling - which found that car finance firms did not unlawfully mis-sell products simply by failing to disclose commissions - narrows the scope for car finance compensation claims, but it doesn't eliminate them entirely. 'Anyone who signed up for a discretionary commission arrangement (DCA) between 2007 and 2021 should still be eligible for compensation; the FCA [Financial Conduct Authority] is expected to set out next steps regarding this ruling in the coming weeks. 'In the meantime, we strongly advise against using claims management firms, which often take a hefty cut of any compensation. 'Instead, there are free tools and official routes available to help you make a claim directly. 'And if the FCA introduces the mooted 'opt-out' scheme, you may not need to do anything at all - your lender will be required to contact you. 'Until then, sit tight, avoid unnecessary fees and keep an eye on updates from the regulator.' 06:34 PM BST Motorist involved in Supreme Court case 'dumbfounded' by ruling One of three drivers involved in a legal row over motor finance compensation has said he is 'dumbfounded' after the Supreme Court ruled that lenders are not liable for hidden commission payments. Marcus Johnson, then a factory supervisor, was buying his first car in 2017 and paid £1,650.95 in commission as part of a finance agreement. In October last year, the Court of Appeal ruled that the 35-year-old and two other drivers who had also paid commission as part of car finance agreements before 2021 were entitled to compensation. The court ruled that the motorists were not told either clearly enough or at all that the car dealers, acting as credit brokers, would receive a commission from the lenders for introducing business to them. The Supreme Court overturned the decision on Friday, but said Mr Johnson should retain his compensation and interest as he was in an 'unfair' relationship with the lender. When asked by he felt about the outcome of the case, Mr Johnson, from Cwmbran in Wales, said: 'It was surprise and sadness, because I was quite confident, just based on how I felt about it, the unfairness of what happened to me. 'I thought people looking at all the information would come to the same conclusion, and I'm just dumbfounded. 'I feel terrible that people won't be able to claim anything like I have.' Mr Johnson said he did not 'disagree with commission' as he understood 'that that is how the market works'. But he said that the ruling 'sounds like it's fine to secretly overcharge customers for commission'. 06:11 PM BST FCA to consider redress scheme for some car finance payments Britain's financial watchdog will this weekend reach a decision on whether to offer a redress scheme for some car finance customers. The Financial Conduct Authority said it would decide before financial markets open on Monday whether to provide some form of remedy to people who took out car finance and paid commission they did not know about. A spokesman for the regulator said: 'We welcome that the Supreme Court has clarified the law and are grateful to the Court for delivering the judgment after the market closed. 'We want to bring greater certainty for consumers, firms and investors as quickly as possible. 'We will be working through the weekend to analyse the judgment and determine our next steps. 'We said we would set out within six weeks whether we would consult on a redress scheme. But we want to provide clarity as quickly as possible. 'So, we will confirm whether we will consult on a redress scheme before markets open on Monday 4 August. 'Our aims remain to ensure that consumers are fairly compensated and that the motor finance market works well, given around 2 million people rely on it every year to buy a car. 'If we do decide to propose a redress scheme, we'll consult widely. In designing a redress scheme, as we have previously said, we will balance principles including fairness, timeliness, and certainty.' 06:01 PM BST Lawyers ready fresh claims over motor finance debacle Lawyers are readying themselves to file lawsuits against banks after the Supreme Court left the door open for some compensation claims, Louis Goss reports. Lizzy Comley, from law firm Slater and Gordon, said people who took out car loans could still make claims on the basis their agreements were 'unfair' even after the Supreme Court largely ruled in favour of the banks. Ms Comley said: 'Where it was unfair, you can still seek redress for fixed commission.' 'You're going to have to establish that actually there were a number of different factors that made a particular arrangement unfair, and you'll have to do that on a bespoke basis.'Factors that could demonstrate unfairness include the characteristics of the customer and the size of the commissions paid, Ms Comley said. 05:52 PM BST Car finance industry welcomes ruling The UK's main motor finance body has welcomed the Supreme Court ruling, calling it an 'excellent outcome'. The Finance and Leasing Association represents dozens of lenders. Stephen Haddrill, director general, said: 'This judgment is an excellent outcome. It properly reflects the role and responsibilities of dealers, lenders and customers, and it has restored certainty and clarity to the largest point-of-sale consumer credit market in the UK. 'In addition, it has also restored confidence to the sector, confirming that it remains a solid investable option – which in turn means the supply of affordable motor finance will continue for customers. 'Cars are an essential part of UK life – and for many people, relying on a car means relying on motor finance. It's a product that's trusted and valued by our customers – just over 80pc of new cars are bought on finance, as is a large percentage of used cars. 'The FCA now has the legal clarity to continue its work to establish if a redress scheme is needed, and of course the thousands of unfounded complaints submitted to lenders by claimant law firms and CMCs can now be removed from the system.' 05:38 PM BST Car finance claims will not be 'easy win' Nicola Pangbourne, partner at Kennedys law firm, said drivers should be 'very pessimistic' about getting any compensation if they took out a car loan. She said proving customers had an 'unfair' relationship with a bank would prove challenging, not least because they would have to have all the documentation about the loan. 'The court ruled there was an unfair relationship in one case but that was very fact-specific. It's not going to be the same for everybody,' she said. 'If I was a driver, I would be very pessimistic about getting compensation. There's now quite a few hurdles they've got to get through. It will be difficult to find out the details about what commission rates were paid. 'It will not be an easy win.' She said the Supreme Court's decision was 'very good for the banks'. 'It rightly clarifies that there is no fiduciary duty when you are a car dealership. The banks are going to be breathing a sigh of relief,' she said. 05:26 PM BST Could you still get compensation? The court's decision means lenders including Lloyds, Barclays and Santander are likely to be shielded from the majority of claims that would have cost billions of pounds. As things stand following today's decision, far fewer consumers look poised to be eligible for reimbursement. Telegraph Money explains what you should and shouldn't do next... 05:17 PM BST Motorists could get 'automatic' compensation in some cases, Martin Lewis says Some customers who bought cars on finance could be offered 'automatic' compensation by Britain's financial regulators in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, Martin Lewis has suggested. The personal finance expert said: 'My suspicion is the FCA will within weeks announce consultation on a redress scheme for discretionary commission cases. You may not even have to claim it, could be automatic. 'And with excessive commissions I suspect more guidance will come on that at a similar time. 'If you sign up to a claims firm now, you may have to give it a cut even if it does nothing. So just sit on your hands for now.' The regulator had been looking at bonuses paid to dealerships - known as Discretionary Commission Arrangements (DCA) - which were higher if dealers get customers to take out loans at higher interest rates. DCAs were banned by the FCA several years ago but the watchdog is pursuing an investigation into historical deals dating back to 2007. 05:14 PM BST 'Worst case scenario' averted for banks, analysts say Banks appear to have swerved the worst of the financial impact of the car finance scandal after the Supreme Court rejected the majority of claims in a landmark case today. Gary Greenwood, an analyst at Shore Capital, said: 'The broad read across is that the extreme scenario of fiduciary duty and bribery have been rejected - therefore the worst case scenario is off the table for the banks. 'It allows the FCA to come up a redress plan that only punishes those that need to be punished. It's a positive impact for Close Brothers in particular.' Susannah Marsh, a lawyer at Moore Barlow, said: 'This decision prevents what could have been the biggest consumer compensation crisis in UK history after PPI and the Chancellor can now park any plans for retrospective legislative intervention. 'As the threat of billions in industry-wide payouts has been lifted, the financial services sector may breathe a sigh of relief, however this doesn't put a pin in the issue entirely. 'While the Supreme Court ruling might prevent mass litigation, there may still be litigation to come. Ultimately, we're not out of the woods yet. Each case will turn on its facts and there will still be circumstances where a motor broker could be found to owe fiduciary duties.' 05:08 PM BST 'Excessive' claims could still come to court, says Martin Lewis Customers who were mis-sold car loans and charged 'excessive' commission could still bring claims in the motor finance scandal, Martin Lewis has suggested. The MoneySuperMarket founder said that the fact there was 'no disclosure [of] commission will not make arrangement unfair', but deals with excessive commission could still have a claim. In the case that was upheld, a finance firm charged a car customer 55pc commission as part of their loan. Mr Lewis said: 'The fact it was so high is powerful indication that relationship between the customer and finance company was unfair. 'Other cases can be brought on case by case basis if excessive commission and/or misleading documents.' 05:04 PM BST Chancellor 'respects' Supreme Court judgment The Government has said it will now work with regulators to unpack the Supreme Court's ruling and its impacts on consumers, banks and the car industry. A Treasury spokesman said: 'We respect this judgment from the Supreme Court and we will now work with regulators and industry to understand the impact for both firms and consumers. 'We recognise the issues this court case has highlighted. That is why we are already taking forward significant changes to the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Consumer Credit Act. These reforms will deliver a more consistent and predictable regulatory environment for businesses and consumers, while ensuring that products are sold to customers fairly and clearly.' 04:55 PM BST Supreme Court rejects majority of claims in car finance scandal The Supreme Court has rejected two of the claims before it in the car finance scandal. Lord Reed told the court that the commission paid to car dealers was 'not a bribe'. However, he said the court had upheld a claim from a third claimant over an 'unfair' relationship between a customer and a finance company. He said that in this case the 'financial commission was so high' that it was unfair. Lord Reed said: 'The finance company should pay the amount of the commission plus interest.' In a written summary of the judgment rejecting the majority of the claims, the Supreme Court said: 'A finance package on acceptable terms was always going to be an integral part of what had to be negotiated to bring the transaction to fruition. 'No reasonable onlooker would think that, by offering to find a suitable finance package, the dealer was thereby giving up, rather than continuing to pursue, its own commercial objective of securing a profitable sale.' However, in one of the claims, the court decided that the 'fact that the undisclosed commission was so high is a powerful indication that the relationship' was unfair. 04:50 PM BST Court of Appeal decision was a 'shock' to industry The Supreme Court has considered three cases seeking to claw back commissions paid to dealers. Lord Reed says the cases are based on three arguments: the commissions amounted to a 'bribe'; the dealers had a 'fiduciary' duty to look out for the best interests of customers and the commission violated this; and in one case it was argued that the relationship with the finance company was 'unfair' based on the consumer credit act. He adds the decision of the Court of Appeal was a 'shock' to the industry and the FCA. 04:44 PM BST Court lays out how car loan scheme works The case revolves around two relationships, says Lord Reed, the Supreme Court president: the agreement between banks and dealerships and the agreements between the customer and banks. Lord Reed says it considered the two relationships as a whole as both agreements are contingent on each other. He said they feature a 'three-cornered' arrangement between customers, financiers and dealers. He adds: 'The important point to understand is the car dealer has an interest in the negotiation over the customer's finance package.' The customer does not deal with the finance company directly, he says. The dealer acts as an intermediary. 'The dealer does not act as the agent of the customer,' he says. 'It does not give the customer any reassurance that it is setting its commercial interest aside.' 04:39 PM BST Supreme Court delays judgment to avoid financial volatility The court is now in session. The Supreme Court has confirmed it delayed delivering a judgment on the car finance scandal to avoid volatility on the London stock market given the huge implication for Britain's financial services industry. The President of the Supreme Court, Lord Reed of Allermuir, confirmed the FCA and other parties had requested the decision was handed down after markets closed to avoid 'market disorder', and that nobody had objected. 04:20 PM BST Bank shares fall ahead of Supreme Court ruling UK bank shares are trading down this afternoon ahead of the Supreme Court's ruling. Lloyds Bank, which is the most exposed to the motor finance matter, is down 2.7pc and Barclays is 3.65pc lower. They are among the heaviest losers on the FTSE 100, which is down 0.65pc. Close Brothers, a smaller FTSE 250 lender also heavily involved, has fallen 2.6pc. The Supreme Court will issue its judgement starting at 4:35pm - shortly after the London stock market closes. 04:12 PM BST Timeline: How the car finance scandal unfolded 04:05 PM BST Banks set aside billions to pay potential claims Some of Britain's biggest banks have already set aside billions of pounds to cover potential claims if today's Supreme Court verdict does not go their way. Lloyd's, through its Black Horse division, was the UK's top motor finance lender and the bank has already put aside £1.2bn for possible compensation. Santander has earmarked £295m and Barclays has set aside £90m. Close Brothers, a smaller specialist lender deeply embedded in the market, has provisioned £165m and Investec has set aside £30m. The scandal also threatens to blow a hole in the Government's finances. Treasury officials believe that a string of major firms could use compensation payments to people who were mis-sold loans to legally cut their corporate tax bills. This would reduce revenue for the Treasury at a time when the Chancellor is battling to meet her fiscal targets. Analysis suggests the Treasury could lose up to £5.5bn in corporation tax receipts as a result. 03:52 PM BST Car finance ruling risks 'calamity for Reeves' The Supreme Court's decision later today could have major knock-on effects for the Labour Chancellor, the UK economy and the pockets of millions of consumers. As Louis Goss reported this morning, a ruling that upholds the decision by the Court of Appeal in October could hamper growth in the financial services sector and force banks to pay out billions of pounds in compensation. It could also open the door to a flood of other claims: The judgment could not only unleash a PPI-style compensation scheme worth billions, but also create a fresh headache for Reeves, who fears a ruling against the banks would reflect badly on Britain as a place to do business. Read the full story here: The £44bn car finance ruling that threatens calamity for Reeves 03:42 PM BST Supreme Court to deliver £44bn verdict Good afternoon. The Supreme Court is preparing to deliver a critical verdict over the car-finance mis-selling scandal that threatens to spark a wave of compensation claims and shake the City of London. The UK's highest court is set to rule on an earlier decision that said car dealers should have informed customers about the commissions they were paid by banks when they arranged car loans. The decision could have major implications for Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, who is concerned having another major redress scheme for the banking sector will hit UK economic growth. The court is expected to hand down its judgment at 4.35pm today. The Telegraph will be covering events live here. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
