Every major consumer scandal now follows a depressingly familiar script.

A corporate wrongdoing comes to light. Regulators begin investigating. Consumers start asking legitimate questions about their rights. And almost immediately, an army of claims management companies, lead generators and marketing firms descends, competing not to deliver justice but to acquire claimants.

The car finance scandal is proving no different.

This week, the Information Commissioner’s Office executed search warrants at properties linked to five companies as part of an investigation into suspected unlawful marketing connected to motor finance claims. According to the regulator, businesses under investigation are believed to have sent around 170 million unsolicited text messages in just eight months, prompting more than 12 million complaints from members of the public.

That staggering volume tells its own story. Before many consumers have even had the chance to understand whether they have a valid claim, they have already become the target of an industrial-scale marketing campaign.

The irony is difficult to ignore. A scandal rooted in concerns about consumer treatment has created fresh opportunities for businesses willing to exploit those same consumers through relentless spam, unsolicited texts and increasingly aggressive advertising.

Perhaps most remarkable is that the Financial Conduct Authority has repeatedly made clear that consumers do not need to pay a claims management company to pursue a complaint. The regulator has invested heavily in public awareness campaigns explaining that complaints can be made directly, free of charge, yet many firms continue to market their services as though they are an essential gateway to compensation, often in return for a substantial percentage of any eventual award.

This is not simply a question of nuisance marketing. It is about public confidence in the justice system.

Collective redress exists because individual consumers often lack the resources to challenge large corporations. Used properly, it is an essential mechanism for holding powerful businesses to account. Increasingly, however, that principle risks being overshadowed by an industry whose commercial success depends not on legal expertise but on generating leads at industrial scale.

The regulator’s own actions illustrate the scale of the problem. More than 1,200 misleading advertisements relating to motor finance claims have reportedly been removed or amended since the scandal emerged. That should concern anyone who believes access to justice ought to be based on informed decision-making rather than marketing budgets and click-through rates.

There is, of course, nothing inherently wrong with professional claims management or legal representation. Many consumers will benefit from expert advice, particularly where cases are complex or disputed. The problem arises when legitimate legal services become indistinguishable from high-pressure sales operations that harvest personal data, bombard the public with unsolicited communications and create the impression that compensation is something to be claimed first and understood later.

The ICO’s investigation should therefore be seen as more than an isolated enforcement action. It is another reminder that parts of the claims industry have learned remarkably little from previous scandals. From PPI to diesel emissions, from data breaches to flight delay compensation, each new wave of consumer litigation has attracted businesses whose first instinct is to monetise public outrage rather than protect those affected by it.

Consumers deserve better than becoming the next commodity in an increasingly sophisticated lead-generation marketplace. They deserve clear information, transparent pricing, honest legal advice and the freedom to decide how to pursue their rights without being bombarded by unsolicited texts or misleading promises.

The car finance scandal may ultimately deliver compensation for millions of people who were treated unfairly. That process, however, should strengthen confidence in the justice system, not reinforce the perception that every public scandal is simply another commercial opportunity for an industry that too often mistakes consumers for sales leads.