The Government has made the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (Alternative Dispute Resolution) (Conferral of Functions) Regulations 2026 (SI 2026/259). Made on 9 March 2026 and commencing on 6 April 2026, the instrument appoints the Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI) to run accreditation and oversight of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for consumer contract disputes across the United Kingdom, replacing the previous patchwork with a single national administrator.
Using powers in sections 307 and 337 of the DMCC Act 2024, the Regulations were approved by both Houses under the affirmative procedure. They extend to England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. A definition of “durable medium” is included to require written decisions and notices to be provided on paper, by email, or in another format that can be stored for future reference and reproduced without alteration.
Regulation 3 confers the principal functions on CTSI under Chapter 4 of Part 4 of the Act. CTSI will manage applications for accreditation and for variations, determine those applications, and take action to suspend or revoke accreditation where necessary. It will also receive fees payable by accredited ADR providers under section 299(1) and exercise powers relating to enforcement notices, ADR information directions and disclosure of ADR information.
When ADR providers seek approval to charge fees to consumers, a specific evidential test applies. Under regulation 4, applicants must supply the proposed fee, reasons for charging, an explanation of how income will be used, and mitigating measures to improve availability and avoid deterring access. CTSI must consider this material and issue a written decision with reasons on a durable medium.
For new accreditations, regulation 5 requires CTSI to set procedures that mandate a comprehensive dataset from applicants. Schedule 2 covers identity and contact details, the types and outcomes of ADR offered, dispute categories and sectors, procedural rules including referral time limits and any pre‑conditions, whether ADR proceeds orally or in writing, fees or costs payable by either party, working languages, whether outcomes are binding, grounds for refusing a case and the complaints process. The same information is required for any party with whom the applicant has special ADR arrangements.
Regulation 6 obliges CTSI to publish on its website the procedures for accreditation and for variations of accreditation. This places both new and existing providers on clear notice of documentation standards, evidential requirements and process steps before submitting applications.
Where revocation or suspension is considered, regulation 7 requires CTSI to obtain the operational information listed in Schedule 3. Providers must identify outstanding ADR cases, estimate the time needed to complete or transfer them, provide details of any receiving provider for transfers, and supply a forwarding address for invoicing outstanding fees payable to CTSI.
Separately, if CTSI considers that a provider meets one or more of the statutory conditions in section 298(3) of the DMCC Act that may justify suspension or revocation, it must inform the Secretary of State in writing on a durable medium. This ensures ministerial visibility alongside CTSI’s own casework decisions.
On transparency, regulation 8 requires CTSI to consider the benefit to the public of publishing information about enforcement notices, with an explicit emphasis on systemic issues. Regulations 4 and 8 together are intended to uphold access to ADR while deterring practices that would hinder consumer redress.
Regulation 9 establishes a common information baseline for consumers. CTSI must publish, on its website, the Schedule 2 information for each accredited ADR provider and each exempt ADR provider as defined in the Act. This should allow users and advisers to compare scope, procedures, languages, fees and likely outcomes before engaging with a scheme.
The reporting regime in regulation 10 introduces regular oversight. CTSI must send a quarterly report to the Secretary of State within two weeks of the end of each calendar quarter and produce an end‑of‑year report within four weeks of the end of each financial year, publishing the latter for consumers. Schedule 4 specifies the content: requests to approve consumer fees and the outcomes with reasons considered; the results of accreditation and variation applications; average determination times; average fees paid for applications and by accredited providers; the number of revocations and the statutory grounds; and evaluations of the accreditation system and of ADR provision in the UK. Calendar quarters are January–March, April–June, July–September and October–December; the first financial year runs from commencement to 31 March, then 1 April to 31 March thereafter.
Operationally, ADR providers proposing to charge consumer fees should assemble the Schedule 1 case now, setting out the fee structure, how revenue will be deployed and concrete mitigations to maintain access. All providers should align application materials and public information with the Schedule 2 fields, confirm website content and complaints procedures reflect CTSI’s published processes, and map any special ADR arrangements so they are disclosed consistently.
For traders and consumer advisers, the framework should deliver clearer comparability between schemes and stronger assurance over timeliness, charges and outcomes. The emphasis on publishing information about systemic issues, along with routine quarterly and annual reporting, is designed to surface risks earlier and support evidence‑based policy adjustments. The instrument is signed by Kate Dearden, Parliamentary Under‑Secretary of State at the Department for Business and Trade, with an Explanatory Memorandum available on legislation.gov.uk; no impact assessment has been produced. Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 remains the primary legislative reference throughout.