Expanding the Definition of Litigation Finance: Where Non-Litigated Funding Fits into the Mix
Litigation finance has traditionally been associated with funding courtroom battles or supporting law firms with upfront disbursements of running a case. But the market is evolving. At Fenchurch Legal, we believe that the principles of litigation finance can be applied not only to support access to justice in the courts but also to enable fair consumer outcomes and debt resolution.
As a specialist litigation financier, Fenchurch Legal has built its reputation as a UK-based lender providing credit solutions for high-volume, small-ticket consumer claims. From housing disrepair to tenancy deposit claims, our model was established to ensure law firms have the resources to pursue meritorious claims at scale.
Over the past year, we have extended this model to include non-litigated case types such as Personal Contract Payment (PCP) redress claims and Individual Voluntary Arrangements (IVAs). This development reflects market demand and our commitment to diversification, while staying true to our founding principles of funding high-volume, precedent-backed consumer claims.
Why Expansion Matters
Litigation finance has always been about bridging the gap between meritorious claims and the capital required to pursue them. For many years, that has meant focusing on litigated consumer claims such as housing disrepair, tenancy deposit schemes, and personal injury, where upfront disbursements such as court fees, expert reports, and ATE insurance are essential.
But the challenges facing law firms and claims management companies (CMCs) extend beyond litigation. Growing a sustainable pipeline of cases requires investment not just in the courtroom, but at the very start of the claims journey – through marketing, client acquisition, and submission costs. For PCP claims, while many are redress schemes rather than litigated cases, firms still need significant upfront capital to fund marketing and handle high volumes efficiently.
By widening our scope to include both litigated and non-litigated case types, Fenchurch Legal is responding to this reality. Diversification strengthens our portfolio, reduces concentration risk, and ensures our funding model supports the full lifecycle of consumer claims – from initial case acquisition through to the final resolution.
So, What Exactly Are Non-Litigated Cases?
Non-litigated cases are those where funding is required to facilitate a consumer or business claim, but the process does not progress to court proceedings. Instead, resolution is achieved through submission to a redress or ombudsman scheme, negotiation, or structured agreement rather than formal litigation.
Within our portfolio, non-litigated cases typically fall into two categories:
- Submission-based cases – These involve the submission of claims for compensation or redress without court involvement. Examples include PCP mis-selling, Business Interruption, APP Fraud or other financial mis-selling claims. In these cases, funding supports the costs associated with case acquisition, client onboarding, and claim submission to lenders, insurers, or relevant regulatory bodies.
- Credit Arrangement cases – These relate to structured financial solutions such as Individual Voluntary Arrangements (IVAs), where funding supports the acquisition and setup of consumer debt arrangements. Rather than seeking compensation, these cases help consumers manage or restructure existing liabilities under regulated insolvency or debt-management frameworks.
Together, these categories form the non-litigated segment of our portfolio — providing steady, scalable funding opportunities while avoiding the time, cost, and risk of litigation. Across all funding categories, both litigated and non-litigated, our strategy remains consistent: we partner with high-quality, regulated businesses that have robust infrastructure, sound governance, and the capacity to scale efficiently and responsibly.
What This Means for Funders and Borrowers
For funders, diversification is the key advantage. By funding both litigated and non-litigated claims, our portfolio is no longer concentrated solely on case disbursements tied to litigation outcomes. Instead, it combines different case types and repayment profiles – a balance that strengthens capital resilience and creates a more predictable return profile.
For borrowers, the benefit is greater flexibility. Access to funding is no longer limited to disbursements. We can now support the full lifecycle of their businesses, from marketing and client acquisition, through to case submission, and litigation where needed.
In practice, this expansion sets Fenchurch apart from traditional funders. Few players operate across both litigated and non-litigated claims at scale. By doing so, we are strengthening our position as a specialist litigation financier with a diversified model that delivers for both our investors and borrowers.
While our scope has expanded, our fundamentals remain the same: every facility is underpinned by robust underwriting, secured agreements, and strong, precedent-backed claims.
Conclusion
Diversifying beyond litigated cases is a natural step in Fenchurch Legal’s evolution. By incorporating both submission-based and credit arrangement-linked cases into our portfolio, Fenchurch Legal is broadening the scope of what this asset class can achieve.
As a specialist litigation financier, we remain committed to funding high-volume, precedent-backed consumer claims while redefining the boundaries of litigation finance itself. By blending litigated and non-litigated case types, we’re building a funding model that is more resilient, more diversified, and better equipped to meet the demands of a changing market.
