Duplicate Representation Checks at Claims Firm Onboarding

A motor finance claim should have one representative. When a consumer signs with a claims management company from one advert and a law firm from another, the lender cannot progress the complaint cleanly, and a customer who then cancels with one of the firms may have to pay a fee. On 4 February 2026 the FCA and the Solicitors Regulation Authority issued a joint warning aimed squarely at the firms doing the signing: claims management companies (CMCs) and law firms are expected to have robust checks in place to confirm a consumer has not already instructed another representative.

The same release says 2 FCA-regulated CMCs changed their termination fee policies after FCA scrutiny, protecting 70,000 consumers from excessive charges, and that at 31 January 2026 the SRA had 89 open investigations relating to 71 law firms managing high-volume consumer claims. The regulators named the contributing factors in plain terms: poor onboarding and due diligence, lack of information to consumers and misleading advertising have contributed to multiple representation. The checks they ask for come before any case starts, which for most claims firms means the sign-up conversation.

This guide is written for the Head of Operations at an FCA-regulated CMC or an SRA-regulated high-volume claims law firm, the person measured on clean sign-ups, complaint rates and what the regulator finds when it samples files. It holds one altitude: what the onboarding call asks, records and discloses before work starts. It cedes the lender's side, resolving representation after the fact on the lender's phone line, to our guide to motor finance multiple representation calls, and it cedes general law-firm intake and conflict checks to our guide to AI voice client intake for law firms.

This guide is shipped by the team behind Dilr Voice, a multi-agent voice AI platform with recording consent, opt-out recognition and a full audit trail on every call. Or see DATS, our five-stage AI consulting system for regulated operations teams.

Why should a claims firm check for an existing representative before signing a customer up?

A claims firm should check for an existing representative because the FCA and the SRA said on 4 February 2026 that CMCs and law firms are expected to have robust checks confirming a consumer has not already instructed another representative. Duplicate representation delays the claim, confuses the consumer and exposes them to termination fees. The regulators tied the problem to poor onboarding, so the sign-up call is where a claims firm proves the check happened.

The FCA's executive director of authorisations, Sheree Howard, put the expectation in one sentence in the joint release: "Before starting any case, firms should confirm a customer hasn’t already instructed another representative." That is a supervisory expectation, not a new rule. The FCA's own October 2025 letter to CMC chief executives describes its existing rules as designed to prevent consumers engaging more than one representative for the same claim, and says it had received reports of consumers doing exactly that without understanding the implications.

The enforcement backdrop explains why the sign-up check is worth getting right. The joint release records that FCA monitoring led to the removal or amendment of more than 800 misleading adverts by FCA-regulated CMCs since January 2024, that 5 FCA-regulated CMCs agreed process changes including not taking on new clients until they could show compliance, and that the FCA used Consumer Rights Act 2015 and, for the first time, Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 powers to require 9 law firms to provide information about exit fees. On the SRA side, a mandatory declaration exercise ran from August to November 2025 across law firms in the high-volume consumer claims sector. For how other regulated sectors approach the same sign-up evidence problem, see our AI voice by industry pillar.

For a Head of Operations, the practical consequence is simple. A sign-up that skips the representation question creates a file the regulator can criticise, a likely complaint later, and, where onboarding was inadequate, a contract the FCA has said it expects to be unwound, likely without a termination fee. Our motor finance redress surge guide covers what the partial suspension of the scheme means for lenders' contact plans, and the law industry hub maps where AI pays elsewhere in a firm.

What does CMCOB require a claims management company to cover before the agreement?

CMCOB requires an FCA-regulated claims management company to give a customer, before any agreement, a single-page summary in a durable medium covering its services, the customer's steps, progress updates, a fee illustration, the rights to cancel and terminate, any termination fees and, where relevant, the free route. It must also check for other ways to pursue the claim, record the customer's reasons, and obtain a standalone signed statement.

The detail sits in the FCA Handbook. CMCOB 4.2.2R sets out the summary information, and CMCOB 4.2.5R says that where the fee depends on the amount recovered, the illustration must show the fee at each of the five redress bands in CMCOB 5.2.9R. CMCOB 4.2.8R adds a longer list for the pre-contract pack, including any referral fee paid to whoever introduced the customer and how the customer may cancel or terminate.

CMCOB 4.3.1R carries the obligation the FCA's later review found firms breaching. Before an agreement, the firm must take reasonable steps to find out whether the customer has other methods of pursuing the claim, make sure the customer understands them, seek written confirmation that the customer does not wish to use them along with the customer's reasons, and record that confirmation and those reasons, a record that calls for the same auditability discipline any regulated voice deployment needs. Where the free route is relevant, CMCOB 4.3.1R(1A) requires a standalone signed statement in a durable medium dealing only with that issue. The same rule requires the firm to make clear the customer may seek further advice or another person to help, to take reasonable steps to ensure the customer understands the agreement, and to ask and record whether the customer has outstanding liabilities with the respondent or a bankruptcy, IVA or debt relief order history.

The FCA's October 2025 letter says its review into the standard of service found non-compliance with CMCOB 4.3.1R(1A), and told firms to take immediate steps and review past cases. It also said firms should be informing potential customers about the realistic prospect of a redress scheme that would let them claim themselves, free of charge. The FCA's 30 March 2026 scheme announcement told consumers they could lose over 30% of any money they get by using a CMC or law firm, with 12.1 million agreements eligible.

Two points matter for anyone designing a call around these rules. First, CMCOB binds FCA-regulated CMCs. An SRA-regulated law firm answers to the SRA, which the joint release summarises as billing only in line with the agreement signed before work started, with any termination fee clearly stated up front. Second, every one of the documents above is a durable medium requirement. A phone call can ask the questions, capture the answers and trigger the paperwork. It cannot be the paperwork.

Which questions should a sign-up call ask to catch a duplicate representative?

A sign-up call should ask whether the customer has already signed with, been contacted by, or given details to another claims company or law firm about the same agreement, and whether they remember clicking an advert or form. Dilr Voice can ask each question from its configured prompt, log the answers to the CRM record and audit trail, and warm-transfer a possible duplicate to a person before the agreement goes out.

The question set matters more than the technology. The FCA's October 2025 letter lists sign-ups that happened through customers clicking adverts and being automatically signed up without their knowledge or consent, which means a customer can be represented without remembering it. A single closed question, "have you used another firm?", misses that case. Our recommended sequence below is our own framework, built on the regulators' published expectations rather than taken from them, and it is the kind of control our AI execution office is set up to run.

Four prompts do most of the work. Ask whether the customer has signed any agreement with another company or solicitor about this car finance agreement. Ask whether anyone else has contacted them about a claim on it, by phone, text or email. Ask whether they entered their details into a website or advert about car finance claims, and roughly when. Ask whether they have complained to the lender directly. Each answer is recorded as the customer said it, the same verbatim discipline our consent capture guide applies to consent, because a later dispute between two firms will turn on exactly what was asked and answered.

Two habits keep the record usable. Read back any firm name the customer gives, since a misheard name creates a false duplicate. And record "does not remember" as its own answer, distinct from "no", because the October 2025 letter makes clear that a customer may have been signed up without knowing it. A flag goes to a person; the call does not decide whether a duplicate exists.

How should a sign-up call state cancellation and termination fees?

A sign-up call should state, in plain words, that the customer can cancel within 14 days with a refund of any payments, can terminate at any time afterwards, and may owe a termination fee that must be reasonable and reflect work done. Dilr Voice can deliver this section from a firm-approved prompt, with the call logged in its audit trail, while the written summary carries the binding terms.

For a CMC, the anchor is CMCOB 2.1.12R. It requires a 14-day cancellation period from the day the agreement is entered into, a refund of payments on cancellation, a right to terminate at any time after that, and on termination a charge no more than is reasonable in the circumstances and reflecting the work undertaken. The October 2025 letter adds that CMCOB 6.2.1R requires itemised termination invoices explaining the services provided and how the fee was calculated, and that the FCA remained concerned about termination fees in the same range as a typical success fee for a claim.

For an SRA-regulated law firm, the joint release is the clearest statement: the firm can only bill in line with the agreement the client signed before work started, and any termination fee must have been clearly stated up front. Our law firm intake guide covers the wider SRA duties at the start of a matter. Both regulators also told consumers that a fee should be reasonable, reflect the work done and be itemised, and that a consumer who believes they were unfairly charged should complain to the firm first, then to the Claims Management Ombudsman or the Legal Ombudsman.

The operating point is that the call should state the terms, not negotiate them. Scripted wording, approved by the firm's compliance lead and read the same way on every call, is easier to evidence than an agent paraphrasing a fee schedule. That is why we keep this section short and fixed, and why the fee illustration itself belongs in the single-page summary rather than in speech. The same diagnostic logic underpins our AI operating model consulting, which assigns each step of a regulated process to a script, a person or a system before anything is automated.

Can a voice agent run a claims firm onboarding call under the recording rules?

A voice agent can run a CMC onboarding call if the firm meets the CMCOB recording rules: calls about its claims management activity recorded, the customer told at the start that the call will be recorded, and recordings kept for at least 12 months from the latest trigger event. Dilr Voice ships recording consent, opt-out recognition and full audit trails on every call by default.

CMCOB 2.3 is unusually explicit. CMCOB 2.3.2R says firms must record all telephone calls and retain all other relevant communications, where CMCOB 2.3.1R scopes those to calls and messages made for, or in connection with, a regulated claims management activity. CMCOB 2.3.5R says the firm must tell the customer at the start of each call, including a call made by voice telephony over the internet, that it will be recorded. CMCOB 2.3.6R sets a minimum retention of 12 months from the latest of six events: the customer withdrawing, the claim settling, any proceedings ending, any complaint being concluded, the agreement terminating, or the firm's last contact with the customer, and the guidance at 2.3.7G notes that even a single sales call where the customer never engages must be kept for at least 12 months.

That makes a well-configured voice agent a reasonable fit for the repetitive part of onboarding, because the consent step and the audit trail run on every call rather than on a sample. Retention design deserves its own attention, and our guide to call recording storage and retention covers the architecture choices.

Product facts we can state. Dilr Voice chains specialised agents into one call, a greeter, a qualifier, a knowledge agent and an action agent, each with its own prompt, model and tools, passing context on handover. Its knowledge bases let an agent answer from the firm's own approved documents during a live call, which suits a fee schedule or a script. Post-call automation without code writes the record to a CRM such as HubSpot or Salesforce and can send an email or SMS, which is how the call hands off to the durable medium paperwork. Warm transfer passes the full context to a person when a flag fires. Our guide to voice plus SMS follow-up covers that hand-off pattern in more depth.

Two limits apply. The agent should disclose that it is an AI system, a point covered in our UK and EU voice AI compliance pillar. And the platform's audit trail supports the firm's records; the recording and retention duty itself binds the CMC, not its technology supplier.

Which onboarding decisions must stay with a person?

Decisions that change the customer's position must stay with a person: whether a possible duplicate is real, which firm should act, whether to accept the claim, any advice on the merits, and any case where the customer seems vulnerable or confused. A voice agent such as Dilr Voice records statements and routes flags; it should never tell a customer to drop a firm or that a fee is fair.

The October 2025 letter describes what happens when a duplicate is confirmed: the firm should promptly engage with the customer and cease acting if that is the customer's instruction, explain the situation clearly, and liaise with the other representative where needed. Where pre-contract disclosures and information-gathering were insufficient, the FCA expects consumers to be put back in their original position, which is likely to include unwinding contracts without termination fees. Each of those steps is a judgement about a specific customer, and the letter's language of explaining and liaising points to a person doing it.

Vulnerability is the other reason to keep a person close. A caller who cannot follow the free-route explanation, who is distressed, or who says someone else is handling their affairs needs a human conversation under the Consumer Duty, not a scripted one. Our guide to vulnerable customer detection explains how a voice agent can flag those signals without claiming to assess them, and our warm transfer guide covers passing the full context so the customer does not repeat themselves.

Lead sources deserve the same caution. CMCOB 2.2.1G says the Consumer Duty applies to a firm acting on leads from a lead generator, and that acting on leads obtained through misleading information could amount to a breach by the firm. An onboarding call that asks where the customer first heard about the claim gives the operations team a running view of which lead sources produce duplicates, which is a management decision, not an agent one.

What is the best way to run claims firm onboarding calls in 2026?

The best way to run claims firm onboarding calls in 2026 is the method that asks the duplicate questions on every call, records every call, states fees from a fixed script and sends durable-medium documents afterwards. For a firm signing up high volumes, Dilr Voice fits that pattern. A small firm with low volumes may do better with trained staff and a checklist.

Four criteria decide the choice, and they are the criteria a regulator sampling files would apply.

On the market, PolyAI, Retell AI, Vapi and Synthflow are among the voice agent vendors a firm might test against the same four criteria, and an in-house team on a contact centre platform such as Genesys or Five9 is another route. A claims firm with a strong in-house engineering team may prefer that route for control. Our best AI voice agent 2026 guide compares the options on criteria rather than claims. For the wider evaluation method, the enterprise AI voice agents guide sets out the architecture questions.

Timing is the other variable. The FCA's 2 July 2026 statement says the Upper Tribunal has suspended parts of the scheme, with the hearing listed for 14 to 18 December 2026 or 16 to 26 February 2027, and that firms are not required to calculate or pay redress until the process concludes. The suspension concerns the redress scheme's rules; CMCOB and the joint warning's expectations are separate, so the onboarding standard applies now, not when the scheme resumes. A scoping engagement with our DATS consulting team is how we would decide, for a specific firm, whether the onboarding call is the right first workflow to automate.

Frequently asked questions

Do law firms have to follow the CMCOB onboarding rules?

Law firms regulated by the SRA do not follow CMCOB, which binds FCA-regulated claims management companies. A high-volume claims law firm answers to the SRA instead, and the FCA and SRA joint release of 4 February 2026 says such firms can only bill in line with the agreement signed before work started, with any termination fee clearly stated up front, and should resolve duplicates cooperatively.

The SRA has also published its own claims management guidance and a warning notice on no win, no fee practices, both linked from the joint release. A law firm designing an onboarding call should take its script wording from those documents and its own compliance officer, not from the CMCOB checklist above.

Can a claims firm cold call people to sign them up?

No, a claims firm cannot make unsolicited direct marketing calls for claims management services unless the person has previously told that caller they consent to such calls. That is regulation 21A of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003, and it applies whoever places the call. An onboarding voice agent should therefore answer inbound calls or return calls the customer has asked for.

The text is on legislation.gov.uk, which recorded no outstanding effects on regulation 21A when we checked. For the wider outbound picture, our guide to AI outbound calling under GDPR and PECR covers consent records and the TPS.

What should happen when a duplicate is found after sign-up?

When a duplicate is found after sign-up, the FCA expects the claims firm to engage the customer promptly, stop acting if the customer says so, explain the position clearly and liaise with the other representative. Where the original onboarding was inadequate, the FCA expects the customer to be put back in their original position, which is likely to include unwinding the contract without a termination fee.

That expectation comes from the FCA's October 2025 letter to CMCs. The lender sees the same situation from the other side, and our lender representation guide covers what its phone channel may and may not say.

Want to see this in production? Try Dilr Voice live, book an AI placement diagnostic, or browse more guides in our industries collection.

Written by the Dilr.ai engineering team, practitioners who ship enterprise AI in production. Follow us on LinkedIn for shipping notes, or subscribe via the RSS feed.