New polling reveals significant public support for opt-out collective claims
London, 14 January 2026 - New national polling shows strong, cross-demographic support for the UK’s opt-out collective actions regime, with public support for collective actions outweighing opposition. Respondents strongly agreed that collective claims can promote fairness, ensure compensation reaches those affected and encourage better corporate compliance.
It is also clear that a constant minority remains uncertain, as a result of a lack of awareness of the regime. A government public information campaign using a wide range of sources, including the publication of settlement and judgment awards that can be claimed, would bring much needed awareness about the regime, ensuring UK citizens and small businesses are up to speed with the important rights the Government armed them with, including the right to claim compensation.
A public mandate for accountability
The polling shows:
· Two-thirds (66%) of the UK public want to be included in collective claims automatically, rather than having to sign up individually.
· When included automatically, 70% say they would remain part of the claim.
· Nearly two-thirds (64%) support making collective claims easier to bring, with only 6% opposed.
· A notable minority, however, did not know the answer, indicating the government could do more to increase understanding of the collective regime.
These findings are the result of a poll which represents every region, age group and socio-economic category, demonstrating broad national backing for a system that delivers practical access to justice.
Consumers want real redress - not weaker protections
The polling highlights a striking contrast to the claims made by corporate-funded groups opposing the regime.
Those who were aware of the regime are clear about what they want: a system that returns unlawful gains, removes barriers to participation, and allows ordinary people and small businesses to challenge unfair practices by major companies. Willingness to participate is strongest where claims are automatic or cost-free but falls sharply where individuals are required to take proactive steps, which may typically include complex funding and insurance arrangements), reinforcing the need to minimise these barriers to participation.
The recent Kent v Apple judgment - the first successful judgment in an opt-out claim and worth over £1.5 billion - illustrates the scale of harm the regime is capable of addressing. Without opt-out proceedings, consumers would have had no realistic route to pursue such a case and the unlawful profits would have remained with the infringer. This year will also see millions of consumers represented in court against firms such as Sony, Google and Amazon in claims valuing billions of pounds, reinforcing the need to protect the regime.
And, crucially, the Government itself has relied on the collective actions system: in the recently certified Motorola claim – to recover unlawful overcharges on behalf of affected UK Government bodies, charities and NGOs – the largest proposed class member is the Home Office. This demonstrates that opt-out proceedings are not only effective but are used by the state to protect the public interest.
Public knowledge is improving but not yet universal
People are generally supportive and, once the distinction between opt-in and opt-out mechanisms has been explained, they have a clear preference for automatic inclusion in claims. The polling also shows that, while awareness of collective legal actions in the UK is growing, it is not universal.
Around two-thirds of respondents had heard of collective actions, yet only a minority felt they understood them well. Throughout the poll, a notable minority also admitted not knowing the answer to the questions posed. This reflects in part the specialist and relatively narrow nature of the current regime, currently restricted to competition claims, but also reflects the fact that we are in the early days still of cases reaching conclusion and more can be done to make sure the public fully understand the benefits of the collective regime and their right to claim from settlements and judgment awards.
A public information campaign delivered by the government, upon whom responsibility is most incumbent, would bring greater awareness of, and involvement in, the regime. The polling highlights that no single source dominates the information flow and as such the government should be engaging with a wide range of channels, including consumer websites, online news and social media, to reach the greatest share of the public.
A crucial tool for fair, competitive markets
Collective actions help keep markets competitive by ensuring rule-breakers do not gain an unfair advantage over businesses that play by the rules. When unlawful profits are returned to consumers and SMEs, that money flows back into the real economy – supporting spending, investment and growth.
This is the largest public poll conducted on the UK’s collective actions regime so far, and its findings are unequivocal: people want stronger mechanisms to challenge corporate misconduct, not weaker ones.
A strong opt-out system signals that the UK is not a soft target for anti-competitive or exploitative conduct, but a jurisdiction where misconduct carries real consequences and where responsible businesses can compete on equal terms. It sends a clear message that the UK is not a playground for exploitation by big business, but a country committed to accountability, fairness and economic resilience – values that are intrinsically British.
Anthony Maton, Global Co-chair of Hausfeld, said:
“The message from the public could not be clearer: people want fair markets, meaningful accountability and a system that ensures rule-breaking companies cannot simply retain unlawful gains.
The findings show that the people who are aware of collective actions see their value, but equally a strong theme emerges i.e. that more still needs to be done including by the government around awareness and education, and the smart use of consumer websites, online news and social media will be paramount.”
More information
The national poll was commissioned by global disputes-only law firm, Hausfeld & Co LLP, and conducted by FindOutNow on 13 November 2025. The poll surveyed a nationally representative sample of 3098 GB adults, filtered to be nationally representative by gender, age and UK region. FindOutNow are members of the British Polling Council and Market Research Society and abide by their rules.
Collective proceedings are a legal mechanism through which multiple individuals or businesses can seek damages for breaches of competition law. They may only be brought before the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) under the regime introduced by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. The Tribunal must authorise (“certify”) any proposed claim before it can proceed.
Opt-out vs opt-in claims
Under the UK’s competition regime, collective proceedings may be brought on either an opt-in or opt-out basis:
· Opt-in proceedings:
Individuals or businesses must actively sign up to be part of the claim and agree engagement and funding/insurance arrangements
· Opt-out proceedings:
Individuals and businesses within the defined class are automatically included unless they choose to opt out. UK-domiciled class members are included by default; non-UK members must opt in. Class members have the right to claim compensation on conclusion from either an agreed settlement or successful judgment award but are not required to do anything prior to that.
Collective opt-out proceedings currently exist only for competition claims and only before the CAT. They are distinct from US-style class actions.
Media enquiries
Silvia Van den Bruel
Marketing & BD Director
svandenbruel@hausfeld.com
+44 20 7936 0921
DRD Partnership
Tom Fisher
tom.fisher@drdpartnership.com
+44 7711 564825
