How are banking disputes changing in 2026?

Banking disputes risk is being reshaped on a number of fronts at the same time. CMS’s Banking Disputes Report 2026 is a data-driven analysis of how claims and complaints are evolving across the UK Banking and Finance sector. It has been written to help in-house legal teams benchmark disputes exposure, spot emerging risk and plan for what’s next.

Sixty second summary:

• High Court activity: The Banking and fFnance sector remained the busiest sector for new High Court claims for the fourth consecutive year.
• Litigation drivers: Key drivers include sector breadth; volume of transactions; follow on claims based on regulatory findings; and the banking system being uniquely exposed to fraud, financial crime and sanctions issues. The report looks at the types of new claims filed across the last two calendar years.
• AI in FS disputes: Generative AI will lead to an increased volume and complexity of consumer complaints and claims in the financial services sector. There are concerns as to whether regulation is keeping up with technology.
• Financial Ombudsman Service reforms: The most significant reforms to the FOS for 25 years are being implemented to ensure it remains focused on deciding individual (rather than mass) complaints.
• Motor finance claims: The report explains the back story to the motor finance scandal and the legal fall out. The issues arising in this consumer mass redress event have provided support for the various reforms being made to the FOS and highlighted the practical importance of the FCA taking control of mass redress events at an early stage. 
• Claimant law firms: The report looks at the regulatory squeeze on claimant law firms pursuing mass consumer claims in the sector.
• Class actions & litigation funding: UK class actions have sought over GBP 28 billion in damages regarding financial products between 2016–2025. Financial institutions remain attractive defendants for class actions.
• Private credit: The Bank of England has warned about the risks of a “private credit crunch” which could lead to increased disputes.