If you’ve ever had a customer ask, “Why is my APR higher than my mate’s?” this is the answer.
Rate-for-risk simply means the interest rate is based on the customer’s risk profile, not a single “one rate for everyone” deal. Someone with a stronger credit file will usually be offered a lower APR. Someone with a weaker file, or a higher-risk deal, will usually be offered a higher APR.
That might sound blunt, but it’s actually how lending stays open to more people. It’s also far easier to justify under the FCA’s focus on fair value and clear pricing.
This guide is written by Marsh Finance for dealership teams. Plain English, no fluff, and UK-focused.
Rate-for-risk is risk-based pricing.
Instead of offering every customer the same APR, the lender prices the agreement based on how likely the customer is to repay, and how secure the deal is overall.
So the APR is shaped by things like:
That’s the core idea: more risk to the lender usually means a higher APR. Less risk usually means a lower APR.
This isn’t new in finance generally, but it’s becoming more important in motor finance, partly because regulators expect firms to show evidence that their pricing is reasonable for the customer group being served.
There are three big reasons you’ll hear more about it in 2026 and beyond.
The FCA has been very clear that firms must be able to explain and evidence fair value, meaning the customer pays a price that makes sense for what they get.
Rate-for-risk supports that because it links pricing to measurable risk factors, rather than pricing that looks random or purely profit-driven.
Customers don’t love APR, but they do understand “stronger credit, lower rate”.
When pricing is consistent and explainable, you get fewer complaints later.
With a single flat rate, some customers get priced out, and others get a rate that doesn’t match their risk.
Rate-for-risk keeps more deals viable without pretending every customer is the same.
Credit agencies have even described this shift as a move away from “flat rate for all” toward pricing that better matches the customer’s profile.
Customers think APR is just their credit score. It isn’t.
Here are the big drivers dealers should understand, because they come up in conversations every day.
This is still the main one. Missed payments, defaults, thin credit files, recent credit applications, it all plays a part.
If a customer is borrowing close to the car’s value, risk rises. If the car is written off or sold early, there’s less equity buffer.
That can push the rate up, or reduce acceptance.
Longer terms can raise risk. More time equals more chance something changes, job loss, illness, family changes, or the car needing big repairs.
Older cars can be riskier because repairs are more likely and values can be more volatile. Some lenders will tighten criteria or price differently.
This is not just “can they pay the monthly”. It’s whether the payment is still realistic when you factor in basics like housing costs, bills, and other credit.
Under Consumer Duty, affordability and outcomes matter. Lenders and dealers need to be confident the deal is suitable for that customer’s real situation.
Here’s a simple script that works.
“The lender sets the APR based on risk. If someone has a stronger credit history, they usually get a lower rate. If the lender sees more risk, the APR is higher. We’ll always show you the full cost and you can decide if it works for you.”
You don’t need to lecture them on credit scoring. You just need to keep it calm and fair.
Also, never compare one customer to another. Compare the customer to their own choices:
That keeps the conversation practical.
Rate-for-risk isn’t just a pricing model. It’s part of how the industry rebuilds trust.
The FCA’s historic work on motor finance has pointed out the expectation that lower credit risk customers should typically receive lower interest rates, and it examined how some commission models could distort that link.
More recently, the wider market has been watching the FCA’s proposed motor finance redress scheme linked to commission disclosure concerns, which keeps attention on how pricing is set and explained.
For dealerships, the practical takeaway is simple:
Consumer Duty isn’t asking you to give everyone the cheapest rate. It’s asking you to deliver good outcomes, including price and value.
Good practice looks like:
The FCA’s publications on price and value talk a lot about evidence, reasonableness, and whether customers are getting a fair deal for what they pay.
No. The APR must still be fair, justifiable, and clearly explained. If a customer group is paying a high rate, firms need to be able to show the overall value makes sense.
No. Rate-for-risk often keeps access open, but the APR may be higher to reflect risk.
Often, yes. Lower LTV can reduce risk.
It can be, because it allows approvals across a wider set of customers while keeping pricing aligned to risk.
Every showroom sees it. Good customers who need a car, can afford the payments, but get declined elsewhere because they sit outside prime credit.
That’s where Marsh Finance fits.
We specialise in near-prime customers and offer solutions that many lenders don’t, including non-prime PCP. Our rate-for-risk pricing looks at the whole deal, not just a score, so you can help customers who would otherwise walk away without a car.
It helps you convert opportunities you’re probably losing today, while still keeping lending responsible and compliant.
If you want a lender that helps you say “yes” more often, we’d be happy to talk.
Rate-for-risk car finance, also called risk-based pricing, means the APR offered to a customer is based on their individual risk profile.
Instead of a flat rate for everyone, lenders assess factors such as credit history, deposit size, loan-to-value (LTV), affordability, vehicle age, and term length.
Higher perceived risk usually means a higher APR. Lower risk usually means a lower APR.
APR can differ between customers because lenders assess risk individually.
Two people buying similar cars can receive different rates due to differences in:
This is standard practice in UK car finance and reflects how risk-based pricing works.
Yes. Risk-based pricing is permitted under UK regulation, including oversight from the Financial Conduct Authority.
However, lenders and dealerships must ensure:
Under Consumer Duty, firms must be able to evidence that customers receive fair value for the price paid.
No.
Dealerships cannot set arbitrary rates. APR must be:
Unjustifiable pricing differences create regulatory and reputational risk.
Car finance APR is influenced by multiple factors, including:
It is rarely just one single factor.
Often, yes.
A larger deposit reduces the loan-to-value ratio, which lowers risk to the lender. Lower risk can sometimes result in a lower APR or stronger approval terms.
It can.
Longer terms increase the time the lender is exposed to risk. More time means a higher chance of changes in employment, income, or vehicle value.
Some lenders price longer agreements slightly higher to reflect this.
Rate-for-risk can actually increase access to finance.
Without it, many higher-risk customers would simply be declined. Instead, lenders may approve the deal but price it higher to reflect the additional risk.
This keeps credit accessible while still protecting responsible lending standards.
Under Consumer Duty, firms must deliver good outcomes and fair value.
Rate-for-risk supports this by:
The focus is not on offering the lowest rate, but on offering a rate that is reasonable for the risk and clearly explained.
It can be.
Because pricing reflects risk rather than using a single flat rate, lenders can often approve a broader range of customers.
That means:
When explained clearly, it can also reduce post-sale complaints.
Yes.
Risk-based pricing can apply to both:
The risk assessment considers the overall deal structure, including balloon payments on PCP agreements.
Potentially, yes. Customers can sometimes improve eligibility by:
Small structural changes can influence lender risk assessment.
Motor finance pricing has faced regulatory scrutiny in recent years, particularly around commission structures and disclosure.
Clear, explainable pricing reduces the risk of future disputes and aligns with expectations from the Financial Conduct Authority around fair value and customer understanding.