The Upper Tribunal has upheld the FCA's decisions to ban Stephen Joseph Burdett and James Paul Goodchild from working in financial services. Mr Burdett and Mr Goodchild previously held senior roles at Synergy Wealth Limited (Synergy) and Westbury Private Clients LLP (Westbury), respectively.The FCA banned the pair from working in regulated financial services for recklessly exposing pension holders to unsuitable investments.The Tribunal also found that it was appropriate for the FCA to impose penalties of £265,071 on Mr Burdett and £47,600 on Mr Goodchild.Because of Mr Burdett, 232 personal pension funds worth over £10 million were switched into high-risk investment portfolios that were obviously unsuitable. The portfolios were created and managed by Mr Goodchild at Westbury, with around 38% of overall holdings linked to a single offshore property developer.Despite his knowledge that the portfolios were high-risk, Mr Burdett allowed Synergy’s customers to receive reports indicating that their money would be placed in low or medium risk portfolios. Mr Goodchild included the misleading terms 'cautious' and 'balanced' in the names of 2 of the 3 high-risk portfolios.In addition, Mr Burdett acted as a director of Synergy despite knowing he did not have the required FCA approval to perform that function. He also failed to co-operate with the FCA’s investigation.The FCA intervened in 2016 to protect consumers, stopping the pensions business of Synergy and Westbury. Both firms subsequently went into liquidation and were dissolved.To date, the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) has paid out over £1.4m to victims.Therese Chambers, joint executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said:'People trusted Mr Burdett and Mr Goodchild with their hard-earned savings and were badly let down. The pair worked together to switch customers' pensions into obviously unsuitable, high-risk investments.'They made significant personal profits from their actions. We will not tolerate such conduct and are pleased that the Tribunal agrees.'The Tribunal noted that 'Mr Burdett’s actions have shown little regard for the interests of Synergy’s clients, pension holders whose pensions were transferred to the Westbury SIPP and were invested in ways which Mr Burdett knew were obviously high risk and hopelessly inappropriate'.In addition, the Tribunal found that 'As an experienced and qualified investment manager, Mr Goodchild must have known of the risk of putting together for pension holders of varying risk appetites portfolios with any significant levels of concentration of investment into an obviously high risk project... He completely ignored this risk, without regard to the interests of the pension holders'. The Tribunal was not satisfied that Mr Goodchild's 'cursory due diligence … was even remotely sufficient to constitute reasonable steps to ensure suitability.'Notes to editorsThe FCA fined Mr Burdett £311,762, which the Tribunal reduced to £265,071. Following the hearing, Mr Burdett provided the Tribunal with evidence of tax he had paid on the financial benefit received, which the Tribunal accepted and deducted from his penalty. Link to the UTTC decision.Read the Decision Notice for Stephen Joseph Burdett (PDF).Read the Decision Notice for James Paul Goodchild (PDF).Synergy and Westbury have been dissolved.Find out more information about the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chambers).Affected customers should contact the FSCS on 0800 678 1100. The FSCS deals with compensation claims when financial firms go out of business. It is an impartial, free service that was set up by Parliament to protect customers.

The FCA has fined Richard Howson £237,700 for his part in misleading statements being issued by Carillion plc. As group chief executive, Mr Howson was aware of serious financial troubles in Carillion’s UK construction business. He failed to reflect this in company announcements or alert its board and audit committee, leading to poor oversight.The fine was imposed after Mr Howson withdrew his challenge to the FCA’s decision.Mr Howson was one of two executive directors on Carillion’s Board. His responsibilities included working closely with the group finance director (the other executive director on the board) to ensure Carillion communicated effectively with investors and had appropriate internal control processes. Primary responsibility for ensuring the financial information disseminated to the market was accurate and not misleading lay with the group finance director. However, Mr Howson played an important role as the Board member with the most expertise on construction and contracting matters.The FCA found that Mr Howson acted recklessly and was knowingly concerned in breaches by Carillion of the Market Abuse Regulation and the Listing Rules.Steve Smart, executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said:'Carillion’s failure was significant. Jobs were lost, public sector projects put at risk and investors, who trusted the company to give them accurate information, suffered large scale losses. That’s why the FCA worked diligently to hold the company and its senior leaders to account.'During the period in question, Carillion’s group finance director was first Richard Adam and then Zafar Khan. They were fined £232,800 and £138,900, respectively, in January 2026.Notes to editorsRichard Howson Final Notice (PDF).Press release for Mr Adam and Mr Khan's Final Notices.Carillion plc (in liquidation) Final Notice (PDF).Mr Howson was the Chief Executive of Carillion from 1 January 2012 to 10 July 2017. He received an initial Decision Notice (PDF) dated 24 June 2022.Mr Adam was finance director of Carillion from April 2007 to 31 December 2016.Mr Khan was finance director of Carillion from 1 January 2017 to September 2017.The FCA has imposed the financial penalty on Mr Howson for being, in the period 1 July 2016 to 10 July 2017, knowingly concerned in breaches by Carillion of:Article 15 of MAR (prohibition of market manipulation) by disseminating information that gave false or misleading signals as to the value of its shares in circumstances where it ought to have known that the information was false or misleading.Listing Rule 1.3.3R (misleading information must not be published) by failing to take reasonable care to ensure that its announcements were not misleading, false or deceptive and did not omit anything likely to affect the import of the information.Listing Principle 1 (procedures, systems and controls) by failing to take reasonable steps to establish and maintain adequate procedures, systems and controls to enable it to comply with its obligations under the Listing Rules; andPremium Listing Principle 2 (acting with integrity) by failing to act with integrity towards its holders and potential holders of its premium listed shares.

We have signed an Exchange of Letters with the International Financial Services Centres Authority (IFSCA). IFSCA is the unified regulator for financial institutions operating in Gujarat International Finance Tec-City (GIFT City), India’s first international financial services centre.This agreement affirms both authorities’ commitment to develop our regulatory relationship.Download our letter (PDF)The letters set out the intention to share regulatory knowledge and best practice to support the development of financial services in both jurisdictions and to promote greater links between GIFT City and UK financial markets.In addition to the Exchange of Letters, to help develop our relationship with India’s financial regulators we will be posting an FCA Financial Services Attaché to the British Deputy High Commission in Mumbai later in 2026.

Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) borrowers will benefit from stronger protections from 15 July 2026, following the Government's decision to bring the sector under the FCA's regulation. BNPL will be subject to the Consumer Duty and consumers will benefit from:Clear information: Consumers will get clear, upfront details about their agreement, including when payments will be due, amounts, and what happens if they miss a payment.Affordability checks: Lenders must carry out proportionate checks to make sure customers can afford to repay what they borrow before offering BNPL.Support when needed: Lenders will need to offer support to customers in financial difficulty, and, where appropriate, direct them to free debt advice.Complaints and compensation: If something goes wrong, consumers will be able to complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service.BNPL provides an important source of credit for many, but there are no protections in place currently for those who use it repeatedly and may not be able to afford it. The aim of the new regulation is to help consumers navigate their financial lives, with appropriate support for consumers.Sarah Pritchard, deputy chief executive at the FCA, said:'We want the Buy Now Pay Later sector to thrive – it provides an important source of credit to many – and we will continue to support firms who want to develop innovative new products. But crucially, no one should be lent to if they're unable to repay, because that could worsen their financial situation. Now Parliament has given us the powers, we’re putting in place proportionate protections for the 11 million people who use it.'Lenders will need to be authorised by the FCA to provide BNPL. The FCA will provide pre-application support to these firms to help them get ready.Notes to editorsBNPL is a broad term which can include credit agreements that are already regulated. The final rules relate to unregulated BNPL agreements, which are defined as deferred payment credit (DPC) in the legislation and Policy Statement.Firms will be able to register for the temporary permissions regime between 15 May 2026 and 1 July 2026. Firms will have 6 months (from the date the regime comes into force) to apply for full authorisation. Find out more about what firms need to do.The BNPL market has grown significantly in recent years, from £0.06bn in 2017 to over £13bn in 2024. According to the FCA’s 2024 Financial Lives Survey, 20% of UK consumers (10.9 million adults) used it in the 12 months leading up to May 2024.Where consumers can afford to use BNPL, and it can work for them in the ways it’s meant to – for example, managing cash flow – they should be able to access it. While firms have a responsibility to check that consumers can afford to repay before offering BNPL, consumers should remember that BNPL is borrowing and make sure they can afford the repayments. If you’re struggling with money, you can get guidance on dealing with debt from MoneyHelper. You can also use the Debt Advice Locator tool to find free services in your area. Find out more about BNPL.Suppliers that provide their own credit will remain exempt from regulation. The exemption of 'merchant own credit' was a decision the Government made in 2024.

The FCA has begun legal proceedings against global crypto exchange HTX (formerly Huobi) for illegally promoting cryptoasset services to UK consumers. Access documents on this claim on the FCA websiteFirms providing crypto products to UK consumers need to comply with rules which protect consumers from unfair and misleading marketing. Advertising cryptoassets on social media or websites without complying with these rules is a criminal offence.Since the rules came into force in October 2023, the FCA has engaged extensively with firms, and the majority have reacted positively in complying with the new regime.The FCA previously warned about HTX’s illegal promotion of crypto services to UK consumers. However, it has continued to publish financial promotions in breach of these rules on its website and on social media platforms, including TikTok, X, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube.HTX operates an opaque organisational structure, hiding the identities of its owners and the operators of its website. Repeated attempts by the FCA to engage with HTX have been ignored. Since issue of the proceedings, HTX has taken steps to restrict new UK customers from registering an account. However, existing UK users can still log in and access unlawful financial promotions, and HTX has given no assurance that the changes will be permanent. The FCA therefore remains concerned that the risk of ongoing breaches continues.Steve Smart, joint executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said: 'Our rules are designed to support a sustainable and competitive crypto market in the UK, ensuring that consumers have what they need to make informed decisions.'HTX’s conduct stands in stark contrast to the majority of firms working to comply with the FCA’s regime. This is the first time we’ve taken enforcement action against a crypto firm illegally marketing their products to UK consumers. We’ll continue to act against firms who ignore our rules.'To protect consumers, the FCA requested social media companies block HTX’s social media accounts to UK-based consumers and requested the removal of HTX applications from the Google Play and Apple stores in the UK.HTX is currently on the FCA’s Warning List. Consumers dealing with this firm will not have access to the Financial Ombudsman Service if they have a complaint.Consumers are unlikely to get their money back if it goes out of business and should avoid dealing with this, or similar unauthorised firms.Individuals can check the FCA’s Warning List to see if a firm is operating illegally and visit the FCA’s cryptoasset promotions page for more information on how to protect themselves.Notes to editorsThe FCA enables a fair and thriving financial services market for the good of consumers and the economy.Our strategy 2025-2030 prioritises fighting financial crime. Over the last 2 years, the FCA has charged more people with criminal offences and is concluding enforcement investigations faster.Following legislation passed by Parliament, cryptoassets were brought within scope of the FCA’s financial promotions regime.From October 2023, all cryptoasset firms marketing to UK consumers, including firms based overseas, must comply with the regime.The FCA has been clear that those who fail to play by the rules risk being placed on the FCA warning list, being subject to website take down requests or facing criminal or civil enforcement action.

FCA v Huobi Global S.A. and Others. On 21 October 2025, the FCA commenced proceedings in the Chancery Division of the High Court against the following parties:HUOBI GLOBAL S.A.(a company incorporated in Panama)PERSONS UNKNOWN (who are the owner of, controller and/or the persons currently in control of all or part of www.htx.com and/or its associated mobile applications (“the HTX Exchange”))PERSONS UNKNOWN (who are the legal and/or natural persons defined as the HTX Operators in the HTX Platform User Agreement (version dated 13 July 2023))PERSONS UNKNOWN (who are the persons currently in control of promotions on behalf of the HTX Exchange on any of the following social media platforms and/or messenger services: X, Facebook, Instagram, Telegram, Tik Tok, You Tube, Discord, Medium and/or LinkedIn)PERSONS UNKNOWN (who are such additional persons who on or before 31 October 2028 become owner or controller of the HTX Exchange and/or become legal and/or natural person within the meaning of HTX Operators in the HTX Platform User Agreement (version dated 13 July 2023) and/or become controllers on behalf of the HTX Exchange of accounts on any of the following social media platforms and/or messenger services (X, Facebook, Instagram, Telegram, Tik Tok, You Tube, Discord, Medium and/or LinkedIn)On 4 February 2026, the High Court granted the FCA permission to serve the proceedings out of the jurisdiction and by alternative means. In accordance with paragraph 7(b) of the Order of Deputy Master Dovar dated 4 February 2026, we set out the key documents in these proceedings.Key documentsClaim Form dated 21 October 2025Particulars of Claim dated 21 October 2025Application Notice dated 22 October 2025Order of Deputy Master Dovar dated 4 February 2026Any person who believes they are one of the Persons Unknown named above and therefore a party to these proceedings should contact the FCA via Enquiries-HTX@fca.org.uk to request any additional documents relating to these proceedings.

The FCA has fined Dipesh Kerai and Bhavesh Hirani for insider dealing in shares of Bidstack Group Plc. Mr Kerai has been fined £52,731, and Mr Hirani has been fined £56,000.In December 2021, Mr Hirani was the interim Chief Financial Officer at Bidstack, a company that placed advertising inside video games. This meant he had access to inside information about a major upcoming deal between Bidstack and a large video game publisher.Before it was announced to the public, Mr Hirani passed this confidential information to Mr Kerai. Mr Hirani then opened a trading account in Mr Kerai’s name and, with his help, bought 1.3 million Bidstack shares in advance of the announcement while in possession of inside information.When the deal was made public, Bidstack’s share price rose by more than 125%. Mr Kerai made more than £9,000 in profit, which the FCA has now required him to return as part of his penalty.The FCA was initially notified of the trading through Suspicious Transaction and Order Reports submitted by a firm, showing the vital role of industry in uncovering market abuse.Steve Smart, executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said:‘Dipesh Kerai and Bhavesh Hirani exploited inside information for their own gain, trading on details other investors couldn’t have known. Big thanks to the firm that reported its suspicions, enabling us to identify the perpetrators and hold them to account. Working with industry we will continue to take action against anyone who misuses inside information and undermines trust in UK markets.’Notes to editorsFinal Notice 2026: Dipesh Kerai (PDF).Final Notice 2026: Bhavesh Hirani (PDF).Mr Kerai’s total financial penalty of £52,731 includes £9,260.74 in disgorgement (plus interest on that amount) and a penalty of £42,000, reduced by 30% through settlement. Mr Hirani’s £56,000 penalty reflects a 30% settlement discount applied to the assessed penalty of £80,000.Both individuals’ conduct breached Article 14 of the UK Market Abuse Regulation relating to insider dealing and unlawful disclosure of inside information.Bidstack Group Plc was an advertising technology company, admitted to trading on AIM until 23 April 2024.Tackling financial crime is a priority under the FCA's 5-year strategy.The FCA enables a fair and thriving financial services market for the good of consumers and the economy. Find out more about the FCA.

We have published a letter to trade associations to provide an update in the development of a Future Entity (FE) for open banking. The letter confirms the appointment of KPMG to provide an independent assessment of proposals to establish a standards-setting body for UK open banking APIs that is capable of becoming the Future Entity. It explains the purpose and scope of the assessment, the respective roles of the FCA, industry, trade associations and the independent assessor, and how firms can engage in the process.We are publishing the letter to ensure transparency and broad access to information across the open banking ecosystem. The independent assessment will support decision-making at a time when the FCA does not yet have legislative powers to oversee a Future Entity.Read the letter

From 6 April 2026, Gemini is closing all customer accounts in the UK. Gemini Payments UK, Ltd (GPUK) is authorised by the FCA to issue electronic money (e-money) and provide payment services.Gemini Intergalactic UK, Ltd (GIUK) offers cryptoasset products. These activities are not regulated by the FCA, although we oversee compliance in accordance with UK anti-money laundering regulations. On 5 February 2026, GPUK and GIUK confirmed they plan to exit the UK market. Effective 6 April 2026, Gemini will close all customer accounts in the UK, in a phased wind-down exercise. Until 4 March 2026, customers can continue using their accounts without disruption. From 5 March 2026, all customer accounts will be placed in ‘withdrawal-only’ mode.We recommend GPUK and GIUK customers read the support article published by Gemini for detailed guidance and frequently asked questions. If you have a complaint about GPUK, consider making a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). As cryptoasset activities are not regulated, they are not covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), and you cannot refer complaints to the FOS. Cryptoassets will come under FCA regulation in October 2027. We want to develop a competitive and sustainable cryptoasset sector. We have recently consulted on proposed rules and guidance aimed at effectively promoting market integrity, protecting consumers, and supporting innovation and competition in the UK cryptoasset sector.

The FCA has imposed restrictions on independent financial adviser Advantage Wealth Management Ltd (AWM), which means it must not dispose of any assets or conduct any regulated activities without the written consent of the FCA. The action follows concerns that AWM is not being managed in a way that ensures that its affairs are conducted in a sound and prudent manner. We issued a First Supervisory Notice (PDF)on 22 December 2025, outlining further details about our concerns and the basis for imposing the restrictions:Treatment of customers– the FCA has concerns about the circumstances in which several AWM customers had their investments moved into cash holdings.Appropriate financial resources– the FCA is not satisfied that AWM has or will have appropriate financial resources.Levels of cooperation– AWM has not been open and cooperative with us.The firm must not conduct any regulated activities without the FCA’s prior written consent and, as a result, can no longer act as an independent financial adviser or provide financial advice. Customers of AWM should seek to find a new financial adviser – there is information on finding an adviser on theMoney Helper website.

The FCA and Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) have today issued a joint warning to claims management companies (CMCs) and law firms involved in motor finance commission claims to make sure consumers don’t have multiple representatives for the same claim and are not charged excessive termination fees. The regulators are reminding CMCs and law firms that they are expected to have robust checks in place to confirm consumers have not already instructed another representative. The FCA has also written to lenders setting out the potential actions they should take to address this issue.If a consumer wishes to switch representatives or terminate an agreement, firms must do so without charging unfair fees. Any fees charged must be reasonable and reflect the work done.Fees charged by FCA-regulated CMCs must provide fair value in line with the Consumer Duty. Following scrutiny from the FCA, 2 FCA-regulated CMCs have agreed to change their termination fee policies, protecting 70,000 consumers from excessive charges.Similarly, SRA-regulated law firms should act in their clients’ best interests. They can only bill in line with the agreement the client signed up to before work started and any ‘termination’ fee must have been clearly stated up-front. Duplicate claims should be resolved through efficient and cost-effective co-operation.Sheree Howard, executive director of authorisations, at the FCA, said: 'We’ve been clear about our expectations of CMCs. Before starting any case, firms should confirm a customer hasn’t already instructed another representative. Where someone signed up without fully understanding what they were agreeing to, we wouldn’t expect a termination fee to be charged. If any fee is applied, it must be reasonable, and reflect the work done.'Sarah Rapson, chief executive of the SRA, said: 'With potentially millions of claims in this area, protecting consumers is our priority. We expect firms we regulate to abide by the SRA's clear standards and regulations. You must act in the best interest of your clients, including those who may choose to terminate their agreement or who may have signed up to multiple firms.'Firms operating here should be under no illusion as to the requirements. We have reminded them of their responsibilities on a number of occasions, including in a recent Warning Notice and in our updated claims management guidance. We will continue to engage with firms in this area and take action where required.'The FCA and SRA will continue to monitor the conduct of CMCs and law firms, and act where poor practices are identified. Poor onboarding and due diligence practices, lack of information to consumers and misleading advertising has contributed to multiple representation.The FCA’s increased proactive monitoring of financial promotions has led to the removal or amendment of more than 800 misleading adverts by FCA regulated CMCs since January 2024. The FCA recently opened an investigation into a CMC following concerns about its advertising and sales tactics in relation to potential motor finance commission claims.Ahead of the FCA introducing a proposed motor finance redress scheme, it will be launching an advertising campaign on 5 February to warn consumers about scammers pretending to be car finance lenders and falsely claiming that people are owed compensation, despite there being no motor finance compensation scheme in place yet.Consumer guidanceConsumers do not need to use a CMC or law firm to claim compensation, and they could lose a significant chunk of any money they are owed if they do.Consumers may choose to be represented, but they must have first had all the relevant information on their options to make an informed choice.Where claims have more than 1 representative, firms should work together and consult with the customer to agree the sole representative.Consumers who sign up with more than 1 representative and then choose to cancel may have to pay a fee.Any termination fee should be reasonable, reflect the work done, and be itemised.Consumers who believe they weren’t given the facts when they signed up or have been unfairly charged by a CMC or law firm should first complain to the firm. If dissatisfied with the response, they should take their complaint to the Claims Management Ombudsman or Legal Ombudsman.Notes to editorsFCA:In October, the FCA confirmed it would be looking into exit fees.Five FCA regulated CMCs have agreed to make changes to their processes following scrutiny, including not taking on new clients until they are able to show they comply with FCA rules.Separately, using powers under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and, for the first time, under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, the FCA, working closely with the SRA, has required 9 law firms to provide information about their exit fees. Some law firms also provided responses voluntarily. This information has been shared with the SRA.We issued a letter to CMCs on 7 October 2025.SRA:The SRA’s updated claims management guidance includes expectations relating to termination fees and multiple representation.The SRA has also published a guide to consumers and has set out its expectations for firms with clients with motor finance commission claims, as well as a Warning Notice to firms about ‘no win, no fee’ practices. Between August and November 2025 the SRA undertook a mandatory declaration exercise for law firms operating in the high-volume consumer claims (HVCC) sector, which includes motor finance commission claims. The declaration asked firms to confirm compliance with SRA rules.From September to November 2025 the SRA conducted an extensive period of engagement around 5 challenges raised in an HVCC discussion paper.At 31 January 2026, the SRA had 89 open investigations relating to 71 law firms that manage high-volume consumer claims. It has also closed 7 firms working in this area.

The FCA and Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) are warning claims management companies and law firms (representatives) involved in motor finance claims to make sure clients don’t have multiple representatives for the same claim and are not charged excessive termination fees We have seen some clients with up to 4 different representatives for the same claim. They risk being charged termination fees, which could be deemed excessive, should they try to cancel duplicate agreements.

The Upper Tribunal has upheld the FCA’s decision that Rangecourt SA (formerly Banque Havilland), Edmund Rowland, the former London CEO and Vladimir Bolelyy, a former Bank employee, acted without integrity. The Tribunal agreed with the FCA that significant fines should be imposed, deciding that fines of £4m, £352,000 and £14,200 were appropriate for Rangecourt SA, Mr Rowland and Mr Bolelyy respectively. The Tribunal also upheld the FCA’s decision to ban Mr Rowland and Mr Bolelyy from working in financial services.Banque Havilland created a plan (initially titled ‘Setting fire to the neighbour’s house fund’) to harm the Qatari Riyal through manipulative trading strategies. The aim was to devalue the Qatari currency and break its peg to the US Dollar, harming the economy of Qatar. Banque Havilland intended to present this manipulative trading strategy to a sovereign wealth fund, Mubadala Investment Company. Mr Rowland and Mr Bolelyy were instrumental in this deliberate misconduct. Mr Rowland was trying to impress Mubadala in the hope of securing future financial benefit for Banque Havilland and his family. In making its findings the Tribunal held that Mr Rowland lied to both the FCA and in court. He also persuaded Mr Bolelyy to lie.Steve Smart, executive director of Enforcement and Market Oversight at the FCA, said:'Motivated by greed, Banque Havilland, Mr Rowland and Mr Bolelyy had a plan to seriously damage the Qatari economy. It is right that they have been held to account.'Notes to editorsSee the Upper Tribunal judgement, dated 3 February 2026 (which includes two drafts of the plan in the Appendices).Banque Havilland changed its name shortly before the Tribunal hearing began and is now known as Rangecourt S.A.As per our previous press release, the FCA decided to fine David Weller £54,000 for his role in the misconduct, and he did not refer that decision to the Tribunal.Warning Notice statement (PDF) published on 1 February 2022.The FCA proposed to fine Banque Havilland £10m, but the Tribunal determined that the fine should be £4m. David Rowland, exercising third party rights pursuant to section 393 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, referred the Decision Notices of Banque Havilland, Edmund Rowland, Vladimir Bolelyy and David Weller to the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that, whilst Mr Rowland did email his father, David Rowland, a copy of the manipulative trading strategy, some of the statements made about David Rowland in Annex B to the FCA’s Decision Notices (which dealt with his representations to the RDC) were not justified. David Rowland’s references were nevertheless dismissed.

Speech by Sarah Pritchard, FCA deputy chief executive, at the ABI Annual Conference. IntroductionIt’s hard to think of a more symbolic venue to discuss driving change in the insurance sector than the QEII Centre.Step outside, and you’re in the shadow of both the Houses of Parliament, and Westminster Abbey. Scrutiny, change and serving citizens on one side. Tradition on the other.That’s where insurance sits, too.As an industry, you have to balance the new with the non-negotiables – finding ways to innovate while ensuring outcomes and trust keep pace. Throughout history, you’ve done exactly that.The UK Customer Satisfaction Index shows you understand and care for your consumers.That, alongside your ability to spot a need and build a market around it, is what makes our insurance markets world-leading.In our ever-changing world, insurance is critical. It shields millions of consumers from losses that could make them financially vulnerable. Underpins resilience for businesses. Drives growth through effective risk management. And is central to a resilient UK economy.Insurance attracts huge amounts of investment from across the globe and makes up nearly one-quarter of total financial services exports.Which is why we don’t just want you to succeed. We need you to succeed.But for markets to continue to grow, firms must feel confident enough to explore new ways to unleash innovation.

The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) and Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) have announced the first cohort of banks and building societies to benefit from their joint Scale-up Unit. The Scale-up Unit announced last year is designed to build stronger ties and provide tailored support for fast-growing and innovative financial firms, helping them to grow sustainably at pace.The 6 firms that expressed interest and have been accepted to the first cohort are:Allica BankClearBankMonument BankNottingham Building SocietyOakNorth BankZopa BankThese firms will receive support designed to help them navigate the regulatory landscape as they develop new products, attract new customers, and move into new markets.PRA and FCA officials will meet directly with the firms, both as a group and individually, throughout the coming months. This will also help the PRA and FCA better understand scaling firms’ experience of the regulatory process, with the aim of improving regulatory processes for the entire sector to help firms expand and innovate.Charlotte Gerken, executive director for UK Deposit Takers at the PRA, said: 'Welcoming the first cohort to our Scale-up Unit is an important milestone. It shows our commitment to helping firms grow in a sustainable way that benefits the financial services sector and wider economic growth.'Jessica Rusu, chief data, information and intelligence officer at the FCA, said: 'We look forward to working with the first cohort as we deliver on our strategy to support growth and UK competitiveness. Our joint Scale-Up Unit enhances the support available to firms as they move from start-up to scale up, helping them to grow successfully and sustainably.'The regulators will be open to expressions of interest from a second cohort of firms later this year, with further detail to follow. The Scale-up Unit is also open to requests for support from smaller, fast-growing insurers on an ongoing basis, rather than through a cohort, in line with the criteria set out on the PRA website.The FCA currently supports new and high growth firms through its Early and High Growth Oversight function. We will further enhance our offer by opening expressions of interest for a new solo regulated Scale-up cohort in the Spring, supporting firms from a wider range of sectors.Richard Davies, CEO of Allica Bank, said: 'Allica are delighted to be included in the initial Scale-up Unit cohort, having led the call for a dedicated regulatory unit to support firms as they scale. The Unit should provide banks like Allica with more capital certainty and more regulatory support to boost lending to the established SMEs that power the UK’s real economy.'Done well, the Scale-up Unit can support the government’s objective to make the UK the location of choice for financial services firms to invest, innovate and grow.'Rishi Khosla, CEO and co-founder of OakNorth, said: 'We’re honoured to be part of the first cohort of the Scale-up Unit. OakNorth was founded to empower breakthrough businesses – profitable and scaling lower-mid-market companies – who are too often overlooked by traditional banks, and this tailored regulatory support will help us better deliver on that mission as we continue to scale.'Having already lent over $21bn to these businesses, supporting the creation of tens of thousands of jobs and homes, we’re delighted to work closely with regulators to build an even stronger platform for sustainable growth.'Notes to editorsRead more about the Scale-up Unit.The Scale-up Unit builds on and complements the regulators’ existing support for early-stage firms, including through the New Bank and Insurer Start-up Units, Regulatory Sandbox, Early and High Growth Oversight function, Pre-Application Support Service (PASS), and AI Lab. It recognises the different types of support needed for firms at the next stage of their development.The Scale-up Unit also aligns with changes designed to streamline regulation, including implementing Basel 3.1, Solvency UK, Strong and Simple, and reforms to the Senior Managers Regime. It also aligns with the Office for Investment: Financial Services, which is helping foreign firms enter and adjust to the UK market.

People who pay monthly for their insurance are saving around £157m a year, with over half the firms the FCA reviewed as part of a market study lowering the cost of premium finance. Interest rates for premium finance have fallen by an average 4.1 percentage points since 2022, saving consumers £8 on a typical motor policy and £3 on a typical home policy per year. The changes result from regulatory attention, fair value assessments and base rate reductions. The FCA has seen even more significant changes made by firms it identified as at highest risk of not providing fair value, following direct engagement with them. These firms reduced APRs by 7 percentage points on average – saving £14 on a typical motor policy and £4 on a typical home policy per year.Graeme Reynolds, director of competition and interim director of insurance at the FCA, commented:'For millions, paying for insurance monthly is not a choice: it’s a necessity. We found that competition in the market is meeting the needs of many consumers. But where we found issues, we used our Consumer Duty to get people fairer value, without needing to write new rules.'While we’re not planning any market-wide changes, we won't hesitate to act if firms fall short of our expectations as we continue to monitor fair value.'In 2023, nearly half of motor and home insurance policies (about 23 million) were paid monthly, often because customers couldn’t afford annual payments.The FCA has confirmed it will not introduce a price cap or mandate that premium finance is provided without interest, as this could restrict access to important cover for customers who can only afford to pay monthly.The regulator expects all firms to consider whether further changes are needed to their premium finance offerings to meet fair value requirements. To help them, it has shared examples of good and poor practice seen across the premium finance market.Notes to editors Read our final report and interim report. The estimated savings for individual motor and home insurance customers quoted above, £8 and £3 respectively, refer to reductions in the average cost of premium finance from £49 to £41 (2022 vs 2026) for motor and £18 to £15 for home (2022 vs 2026). Savings are calculated using representative motor and home premiums of £400 and £220 respectively.Since the Consumer Duty came into force in 2023, firms have been required to undertake fair value assessments to demonstrate if the price a consumer pays for a product or service is reasonable compared to the overall benefits they can expect to receive. We have previously provided good and poor practice on fair value assessments with further examples in the full report. Read our blog on fair value.

What does 'fair value' mean in financial services? It might sound like dry regulator speak, but it’s really asking a simple question – are customers paying a reasonable price for a product, compared to the benefits they get in return?This is not us setting a particular price or level of profit which firms can make. But it's a challenge to firms – can they provide evidence that their customers are getting a fair deal? If they can’t, then they need to look again.This applies across financial services. One of the first areas we looked at after the introduction of the Consumer Duty was the cash savings market – prompted by complaints that savers weren’t seeing the benefits of high base rates. After working with the 9 largest banks, we saw improvements in both the rates available to savers and the volume and timing of firms’ communications to savings customers.We also challenged investment platforms who were keeping interest on their customers’ cash balances. We looked particularly at ‘double dipping’, where firms charged customers fees for holding their cash while also keeping the interest earned.The improvements we’ve seen following our action are saving people an estimated £10m a year.A good deal for insurance customers paying monthlyMost recently, we’ve had a significant impact on premium finance – where customers pay for their insurance monthly rather than a whole year up front. 23 million customers paid this way in 2023. Some of them prefer to budget across the year. But for others, it’s the only way they can afford insurance.We’ve heard the concerns about whether these consumers have been getting a fair deal – and we’ve scrutinised this market closely. In particular, we spoke directly to the firms most at risk of not providing fair value. By that, we mean the outliers in charges or profits. We challenged them to show their working. Some of them could demonstrate that they were providing fair value – that they were charging reasonable prices in relation to the costs they paid and the service they delivered. Challenging firms to improveBut not all firms could show this. Some didn't have the right processes in place to make a high-quality assessment. Others had the processes, but weren’t implementing them in practice. Where this was the case, we challenged firms to improve – and it’s already paying off. Among the group of firms we looked at closely, APRs have reduced by 7 percentage points on average – saving £14 on a typical motor policy and £4 on a typical home policy. Overall, the combination of regulatory attention, firms’ own fair value assessments and a falling base rate is estimated to be saving consumers £157m a year. We know that some stakeholders wanted us to make more significant interventions – for example, forcing companies to offer 0% APR. But we think that this risks reducing the availability of premium finance, which would negatively affect vulnerable consumers who would otherwise struggle to pay for insurance. It also takes time to introduce new rules, because it needs significant consultation. By using our fair value rules, we’ve been able to have a real impact already.Continuing the challenge But we’re not taking our attention away from this market yet. All firms now need to consider whether they need to make changes to their premium finance offerings to meet fair value requirements.We’ll act further if we need to – including challenging individual firms, requiring remedial actions on fair value assessments and, in the most significant cases, enforcement action.

Speech by David Geale, executive director, payments and digital finance and Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) managing director, at the Payments Regulation and Innovation Summit 2026. A payments system that works for everyoneJust before Christmas I was in Billericay for the opening of the 200th banking hub.I got to chat to local people and business owners about the difference the hub will make to their everyday lives. It was great.Although if I’m honest, the biggest talking point was probably the giant chocolate coins made specially for the occasion.Roman coins. Medieval coins. Old two shilling pieces. All the size of dinner plates.I think that’s the first time I’ve seen people genuinely happy to eat into their funds!As educational – and tasty – as the coins were, banking hubs aren’t about nostalgia for cash.They’re one part of making sure the UK payments system works for different people, different businesses, and different moments in life.Sometimes that will mean cash, so it’s positive to see the acceleration in delivery of hubs.That is alongside nearly 150 other cash solutions across the UK, and pledges from banks to maintain their networks - or even in some cases, to open new branches.But other times it might mean cards, digital wallets, open banking, or even stablecoin and tokenised deposits.In reality, all of these methods co-exist and need to work alongside one another.Our job as regulators isn’t to pick winners. It’s to make sure the system as a whole is trusted, coherent and future-proof, whatever form a payment takes.

Speech by Sheldon Mills, at the FCA's Supercharged Sandbox Showcase event. Before we begin, take a look around this room. This is the Supercharged Sandbox. 23 firms at the frontier of retail financial services, chosen from 132 applications. If anyone still doubts the pace of AI change in our sector, this room is the answer.The Board has asked me to lead the long-term review into AI and retail financial services. I will report to the FCA Board in the summer, setting out recommendations to help the FCA continue to play a leading role in shaping AI-enabled financial services. This will culminate in an external publication to support informed debate.Many of you know me from my work on competition and the Consumer Duty. Those seven years taught me something simple but crucial: the real challenge in regulation isn’t dealing with what we already understand – it’s preparing for what we don’t.And that’s exactly what this review is about. Designing for the unknown.

AI Live Testing now open for applicationsAt the FCA, we’re providing a structured but flexible space where firms can test AI-driven services in real-world conditions, all with our regulatory support and oversight and help from our technical partner, Advai. Collaboration and communication is at the heart of what we are doing.The first cohort joined AI Live Testing in October last year. We opened a second application window on 19 January 2026 and are now inviting applications.Moving on from 'POC paralysis'AI Live Testing is for firms with mature proof of concepts (POCs) who are ready to test in controlled market environments, with a view to imminent market deployment.Through live testing we want to help UK innovators move safely beyond 'POC paralysis', or what is often described as 'perpetual pilots'.What we’re actually testingWe’re often asked if we’re testing foundation models as part of AI Live Testing. We distinguish between the AI system and the AI model. That’s because we think the risks and benefits of an AI use case can only ever be understood in the context of its specific use case, ie at the enterprise level.We broadly define the AI system as: the actual AI model, information on the deployment context and core risks (in the deployment context); governance and human in-the-loop considerations, evaluation techniques as well as the input and output controls. This means AI Live Testing takes a holistic approach to AI design and deployment, at the level of the deploying enterprise, rather than a narrow focus on the model itself.How AI Live Testing works in practiceParticipating firms get AI technical and regulatory support, working with subject matter experts who know about financial services regulation, AI systems testing and validation. Participation includes 3 sequential phases:DiscoveryFramework validationAI system testing (including shared evaluation)We focus on both quantitative and qualitative factors to get a truly holistic understanding of the AI system.What’s in it for usIt’s clearly good business practice to test an AI system against its desired outcome. But, for us as a regulator, it also increases our understanding of the debate around safe and responsible AI. One of our key questions as part of AI Live Testing is how to translate principles into safe and responsible AI outcomes for financial consumers and markets. We can only do this by working with firms to establish a consensus on the way forward.AI Live Testing also allows firms to share with us any challenges they are having interpreting and aligning with the regulatory landscape. This gives us material intelligence into what’s happening on the ground, including key risks. This helps us productively adapt and evolve in response to real industry behaviour, which is vital for any major technology shift.How to apply