A £200 million question: What happens if not everyone claims their Mastercard compensation?

“We’re not here to keep the money. We’re here to make sure it goes to people who need it most.” Clare Carter, CEO, Access to Justice Foundation

In a historic legal case, Mastercard has agreed to settle a long-running class action for £200 million. The case was brought on behalf of millions of people in the UK, many of whom were claimed to have been overcharged by inflated card fees passed on by retailers.

If you were an adult living in the UK between 1992 and 2008 and bought something in-store using cash, debit or credit, you’re likely eligible for a payout. The estimate is around £45 per person – and up to £70 if not enough people claim.

And, here’s the bonus, any unclaimed money could go to charity – specifically, to a legal charity most people have never heard of: the Access to Justice Foundation.

Who is the Access to Justice Foundation?

Founded in 2008, the Access to Justice Foundation (ATJF) is a national charity that raises funds and gives grants to organisations that provide free legal help to people who can’t afford it – covering issues like housing, debt, employment and family law.

In short: they help people navigate the legal system when they would otherwise be left without support.

“Since we started, we’ve made over 1,000 grants across the UK,” says Clare Carter, the charity’s CEO. “That includes everything from small food bank-linked advice projects to national services like Shelter.”

What the court said about the money

In its May judgment approving the settlement, the Competition Appeal Tribunal agreed that if any of the compensation isn’t claimed – especially from what’s known as “Pot 3” (unused funds after claimants and funders are paid) – it should go to the Access to Justice Foundation.

This wasn’t guaranteed. Mastercard had proposed a different charity. But the Tribunal ruled in favour of ATJF, stating clearly that:

• ATJF is the statutory charity named in legislation to receive unclaimed damages in collective actions.
• It has a clear and relevant mission: to advance access to justice.
• Using ATJF avoids messy arguments over which charity should benefit.

That means if not all of the £200 million is distributed, the Foundation is first in line to put the rest to work for the public good.

Isn’t this money supposed to go to consumers?

Yes. And the Foundation agrees.

“Our view is that money should go to as many people in the class as possible,” says Carter. “We fully support efforts to increase take-up. That’s the whole point of the regime.”

In fact, ATJF sees itself not as a competitor for funds, but a backstop – a way to ensure that no money gets wasted, and that even unclaimed compensation can still do good.

“When you’re talking about such large sums, even a small leftover could be transformative for people in need of legal help,” says Carter.

Innsworth’s legal challenge

But not everyone is happy with the decision.

Innsworth, the litigation funder that bankrolled the case, has launched a judicial review, challenging the Tribunal’s judgment. They argue that:

• The structure unfairly caps their return.
• The remaining funds shouldn’t automatically go to charity.
• The Tribunal may have overstepped in how it decided who benefits.

This legal challenge is still ongoing, and may delay the timeline for when compensation is actually paid out.

What happens next?

The claims process for consumers is still in development, and could be some months away. But Clare Carter is already thinking about what happens if and when the Foundation receives any leftover funds.

“We’re working closely with partners like Consumer Voice, Which? and Citizens Advice to plan how the money could be used – whether for one-to-one legal advice or more systemic support. But we won’t finalise anything until we know what we’re working with.”

And if you’re wondering whether this is an opportunity for the Foundation to make money?

“No,” Carter says firmly. “This is not a windfall. We’re a distribution vehicle. Just like the funders and the lawyers don’t get to keep the consumers’ share, neither do we. We’re here to make sure it reaches people who need it most.”

A message to everyone

Even if you don’t want to claim your compensation, Carter believes there’s still a reason to engage.

“This regime only works if people take part. It’s about holding big companies to account – and if you don’t need the money, you can donate it. But please don’t just ignore it. This is one of the few ways consumers have real power.”

And for those who care about ensuring everyone has access to justice?

“There are thousands of people in the UK right now who can’t afford legal help – people facing eviction, job loss, domestic abuse. This money, even if it’s unclaimed, can help them.”

Justice that pays forward

The Mastercard case is about compensation – but it’s also about what kind of justice system we want. One where money sits idle, or one where it helps those who need it most.

As Clare Carter puts it:

“The purpose of this regime is to get money back to the people who lost out. But if there’s anything left over – we’ll make sure it still delivers justice.”

Clare Carter is the CEO of the Access to Justice Foundation, a UK wide grant-making charity which aims to increase access to free legal advice. Prior to her role at the Foundation, Clare was a legal aid solicitor and a law centre manager.

Don’t miss out

Sign up to get our claim alerts on how and when to claim your Mastercard compensation.