mastercard-logo

Mastercard faces £19bn lawsuit for imposing “anti-competitive” charges on UK consumers

Written by Joseph Nordqvist

Published: 04:25, July 6, 2016

Mastercard faces a £19bn lawsuit for imposing “anti-competitive” charges on British consumers.

It is one of the first class action lawsuits in the UK since the Consumer Rights Act of 2015 was introduced, allowing class action lawsuits to be brought in competition cases.

MasterCard allegedly infringed EU laws by imposing charges called “interchange” fees on the use of its debit and credit cards.

mastercard-logo
MasterCard processes payments between the banks of merchants and the card issuing banks or credit unions of the purchasers who use the “MasterCard” brand debit and credit cards to make purchases.

The fees have been called “illegal” and “anti-competitive”.

Walter Merricks, the consumer representative spearheading the claim, says all British consumers, not just MasterCard holders, have lost money as a result.

Merricks was quoted by the MailOnline as saying:

‘The prices of everything we all bought from 1992 to 2008 were higher than they should have been as a result of the unlawful conduct of MasterCard.

“To be clear, there is no question that MasterCard acted illegally in the way it conducted its business, a business that affects all of us. All of us overpaid to the tune of up to £19billion during a period lasting 16 years.

“Most of us did not know this, experts who study the retail economy knew it was happening – and so did MasterCard.

“My aim is to get the redress to which UK consumers are entitled and to ensure that MasterCard cannot hold on to the illegal profits it made. This case should send a signal to companies that break competition laws at the expense of UK consumers that they do so at their financial peril.”



In a statement, MasterCard said it “firmly disagrees with the basis of this legal claim”.

The company added: “MasterCard is committed to providing ever more convenient, safe and secure payments to all our customers, including consumers, retailers, governments and banks.”

The law firm Quinn Emanuel is leading the case.

Boris Bronfentrinker, partner at Quinn Emanuel, told the Financial Times: “This is precisely the type of claim for which the new collective action regime was established. This is a landmark case where unlawful anticompetitive conduct has harmed UK consumers.”

Joseph Nordqvist Avatar

Other News

Adobe revenue rises 13% as its AI subscription business expands

Sep 10, 2026

EU cyber-reporting rules start September 11: what manufacturers must report

Sep 10, 2026

Malaysia’s palm oil stocks rise 7.5% as August exports fall

Sep 10, 2026

TSMC’s August revenue jumps 53.3% as chip sales accelerate

Sep 10, 2026

Bank of Japan’s Masu warns inflation could force faster rate hikes

Sep 10, 2026

UK considers wider audit exemptions in company reporting overhaul

Sep 9, 2026

How billing problems can leave businesses waiting for their money

Sep 9, 2026

China’s export surge widens its trade surplus despite faster import growth

Sep 9, 2026

FANUC and Palladyne target the cost of adapting factory robots

Sep 8, 2026

Study links conflicting AI advice to lower confidence in decisions

Sep 8, 2026

Greek pilot tests smarter energy controls in commercial buildings

Sep 8, 2026

OECD finds tax reforms favor investment while budget pressures grow

Sep 8, 2026

IQE revenue rises 43% as AI demand boosts semiconductor materials

Sep 7, 2026

German industrial production falls as car output drops sharply

Sep 7, 2026

Eurozone growth picks up, but employment barely rises

Sep 7, 2026

Why businesses replace equipment that still works

Sep 7, 2026

What happens to a product after a customer returns it?

Sep 7, 2026

Factories weigh the cost of recycled water against supply risks

Sep 7, 2026

Why invoice fraud remains a business risk as payments go digital

Sep 7, 2026

EV battery recyclers face a long wait for used packs

Sep 6, 2026