8:56 am, October 20, 2025
Car dealer Kevin Mackie has accused Renault and Nissan of ‘misleading the public, the media and regulators’ by making ‘manifestly untrue’ statements around his ongoing legal battles.
The embattled retailer is currently embroiled in action against Renault UK Limited, Nissan Motor (GB) Limited and RCI Financial Services Limited, after his banking, and access to key dealer systems, were pulled with seven days notice back in 2021.
Car Dealer reported last week that the three firms had outlined their defence in High Court documents sent to Mackie’s team, in which they claimed that Renault and Nissan were under ‘no obligation’ to provide cars or parts to their dealer networks.
All three also issued statements to Car Dealer and Mackie has now taken issue with what the carmakers have said.
A Renault spokesman told us last week: ‘Mackie Motors has pursued a long running campaign against our company.
‘This has resulted in three separate courts, including the Court of Appeal, dismissing Mackie Motors’ claims, including for alleged breaches of competition law.’
Meanwhile, a Nissan statement said: ‘Three separate courts, including the Court of Appeal, have dismissed Mackie Motors’ claims on this long-running topic, including for alleged breaches of competition law.’
The comments have drawn a furious response from Mackie, who says that neither brand has ever appeared before a court in relation to his case.
He told Car Dealer that his previous court defeats only related to RCI, and accused both carmakers of trying to ‘evade accountability’.
The 57-year-old said: ‘Renault UK and Nissan GB have repeatedly made public statements asserting that “three separate courts, including the Court of Appeal, have dismissed Mackie Motors’ claims”.
‘This statement is manifestly untrue. Neither Renault UK Limited nor Nissan Motor (GB) Limited has ever been a party to any High Court or appellate proceedings involving Mackie Motors.
‘The earlier case concerned only RCI Financial Services Limited, and was limited to the bank’s contractual right to terminate finance agreements.
‘It did not determine or even consider the conduct of Renault or Nissan in withdrawing parts, vehicles, or system access, nor any issues under the Motor Vehicle Block Exemption Regulation (MVBER) or competition law.
‘This misrepresentation was confirmed in The Court of Appeal by the Master of the Rolls and the Head of the Judiciary in England and Wales, who verified that Renault and Nissan were not defendants in any prior litigation brought by Mackie Motors.
‘Accordingly, Renault and Nissan’s public claim is misleading to the public, the media, and regulators, and appears calculated to distort the record while live proceedings are before the Court.
‘Such conduct further underscores my submission that the defendants have sought consistently to evade accountability both inside and outside judicial process.’
Renault declined to comment when contacted by Car Dealer, while Nissan is yet to respond.
Political pressure
Mackie’s case has received significant political backing over recent months, with both Nigel Farage and Scottish MP Dave Doogan highlighting his claims.
Doogan, Mackie’s local MP, has now taken things one step further by writing to Renault boss Adam Wood.
In a letter dated September 11, the SNP politician said: ‘Renault Motors UK has never been before the courts in relation to the substantive issues I have raised regarding Mackie Motors Brechin Limited.
‘The earlier litigation involving RCI Bank, a separate corporate entity, was narrowly confined to the enforceability of a seven-day termination clause.
‘It did not examine Renault UK’s own actions or decisions in this matter including the communications between Renault UK, RCI Bank, and Nissan leading up to the termination of supply; the decision to cut off access to essential vehicles, parts, and dealer systems without contractual cause [or] the wider role Renault UK played in events that led to the destruction of a 45-year-old family business and the loss of local jobs and economic activity.
‘These matters were never tested in evidence, never subject to cross-examination, and remain entirely outside the scope of any previous ruling.
‘For that reason, it is both possible and appropriate for Renault UK to address these questions irrespective of any ongoing legal proceedings between other parties.’
In response to the letter, Wood denied that previous litigation was ‘unrelated’ to the current claims.
He told the MP: ‘Mr Mackie’s decision to pursue further litigation against Renault restricts our ability to engage in discussions with third parties outside of that forum. The previous litigation was not unrelated to the current action.
‘Your concerns for your constituents are understood and noted, but, respectfully, our position remains as previously expressed.’
Car Dealer understands that Doogan has also written to Nissan outlining his concerns.
How have we got here?
Mackie Motors was initially locked out of manufacturer systems in late 2021, amid internal suspicions of money laundering.
Mackie strongly denies the claims and describes the accusations as ‘unfounded’. Within weeks of being shut off, the business was sold in a distress deal.
Last year, both the High Court and the Court of Appeal ruled that RCI did have the right to cut off the dealership at seven days’ notice. Fresh claims are now set to be heard in the High Court.
Sources close to the proceedings have told Car Dealer that latest case will benefit from ‘whistleblower evidence’, which ‘reframes the legal argument’.
Renault, Nissan and RCI say that the ongoing proceedings ‘repeat matters already litigated in previous proceedings’ and accuse Mackie Motors of ‘re-litigating’ the same facts under new legal theories.
The defendants have also issued two counter claims. The first seeks the repayment of a £250,000 interest-free loan, as well as £91,308.94 in interest and the second is asking for £280,943.32 in unpaid costs from prior proceedings, in addition to £52,333.84 in interest.
