F OR TWO years Britons have been bombarded with bizarre television adverts featuring the animatronic head of Arnold Schwarzenegger. In this guise the actor and former governor of California has been urging them—on behalf of the Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA ), a regulator—to claim compensation for mis-sold payment protection insurance ( PPI ) before the deadline of August 29th.

Banks, which sold the bulk of PPI policies, will be even gladder to see the back of Arnie’s bonce. They hope this week’s cut-off, agreed on in 2017 with the FCA , will draw a line under a scandal that proved costly first for consumers and then for the banks themselves. Between 1990 and 2010 lenders reaped £44bn ($54bn) in premiums—and between 2011 and this June repaid £36bn to customers (see chart).

According to Dominic Lindley of New City Agenda, a think-tank, the total cost to the banks, including administrative expenses and fines, has been £48.5bn. At one point Lloyds Banking Group employed 7,000 people to handle PPI complaints. A late surge of deadline-beating claims will swell the industry’s bill. Lloyds made an extra £550m provision in the second quarter of this year, taking its total over £20bn.

At some banks, nearly 90% of claims have been upheld. Average payouts have probably exceeded £2,000. Britons have thus enjoyed unexpected windfalls big enough to splash out on holidays or cars. In the peak year, 2012, banks paid out £6.3bn, equivalent to nearly 0.4% of GDP —a handy boost to consumers when the economy was labouring under post-crisis austerity.

The FCA estimates that 45m PPI policies were sold between 1990 and 2010. Almost half were attached to unsecured loans, for everything from cars to catalogue shopping. One-third were linked to credit- and store-card debt, and one-sixth to mortgages. In theory, loans would be repaid if borrowers lost their jobs or fell ill.

Not all policies were mis-sold, but plenty were. Borrowers were told that they could have credit only with PPI . Some probably did not know they were paying for it, because premiums were quietly bundled in with interest payments. Some who made insurance claims were rejected, for example because they were self-employed or because their medical history ruled them out. Commissions bulked up premiums. At one bank, notes Mr Lindley, an adviser’s bonus for selling a loan with PPI was six times as much as for one without it. A ruling by the Supreme Court in 2014, that large undisclosed commissions on PPI policies breached consumer-protection law, exposed the banks to further claims.

Claims-management firms, which seek out policyholders and take a cut of any proceeds, have done nicely out of the scandal, even though the FCA and the Financial Ombudsman Service ( FOS ), another watchdog, have advised claimants to contact lenders directly. Britons have been irritated by calls and texts from claims companies even more than by Mr Schwarzenegger’s fizzog.