FSA, FCA and PRA fines

The FCA fined Robin Crispin William Odey £1,529,374 and imposed a prohibition order after finding he breached Individual Conduct Rule 1 (COCON 2.2.1R), which requires individuals to act with integrity. The FCA concluded Mr Odey deliberately frustrated an internal disciplinary investigation at his firm (including dismissing members of its executive committee in 2021–22). The Upper Tribunal upheld the prohibition and reduced the FCA’s originally proposed fine to £1,529,374.

The FCA fined and prohibited Richard Brian Fenech for breaches of the APER Statements of Principle 1 and 7 (Principle 1: act with integrity; Principle 7: organise and control the firm’s affairs responsibly and effectively) in relation to pensions advice. The FCA’s Final Notice records a prohibition and a financial penalty of £16,046; this followed an Upper Tribunal judgment that upheld the FCA’s ban, finding dishonesty (including a backdated appointed representative agreement) and failures to oversee pension-transfer advice. The tribunal reduced the monetary penalties and confirmed that most unsatisfactory transfer advice was given by adviser Heather Dunne (noted as occurring between April 2015 and June 2017, leading to transfers of more than £126m), while Fenech was criticised for inadequate supervision.

Heather Imogen Dunne, a pension transfer specialist who traded as Heather Dunne Independent Financial Adviser, was prohibited from working in financial services and fined £41,230 by the FCA for breaches of APER Statements of Principle 1 and 2 — failing to act with integrity and failing to act with due skill, care and diligence in the pensions sector. The Upper Tribunal found dishonesty (including a backdated appointed representative agreement and false claims about when advice was given) and criticised the quality of her pension transfer advice; it found that about 92% of her clients were advised to transfer between April 2015 and June 2017 (over £126m transferred) but determined only 18% of clients received unsuitable advice, and reduced the financial penalty accordingly. The action is recorded in the FCA Final Notice and related FCA press materials and reporting.

The FCA fined Kadir Yusuf Kanizi £20,000 and imposed a partial prohibition on 16 September 2026 for breaches of the individual conduct rules (COCON) for failing to act with due skill, care and diligence—COCON requires individuals to act with appropriate skill, care and diligence. The misconduct related to his role at Vector Wealth in promoting high‑risk bonds where investors were not properly warned; investors are expected to lose about £4m. The FCA calculated a higher sanction (£80,096) but reduced the penalty to £20,000 after Mr Kanizi showed it would cause serious financial hardship and agreed not to enforce the fine if the same amount was made available to Vector Wealth’s liquidators; he also agreed to complete consumer‑duty training before any future role in financial services.

The FCA fined and permanently prohibited Jeffrey St. Patrick Dawkins on 16 September 2026 for breaches of APER and COCON — essentially failing to act with integrity and falling below the fitness and propriety expected of an approved person. The regulator found Dawkins sold his firm (Vector Wealth) in 2019, continued to act as its director/approved person while a disqualified director ran the business and used the firm’s authorised status to promote high‑risk mini‑bonds; investors are expected to lose about £4m. In addition to the £269,233 fine he was ordered to repay £57,298 (plus interest, £68,257) of proceeds he received; the FCA applied an uplift for lack of cooperation and imposed a prohibition from performing regulated roles.

The FCA fined and prohibited Sanjay Maraj on 25 August 2026 for breaches of APER and COCON in the wealth management/private banking sector — the regulator found he failed to act with integrity, was not open and co‑operative, and was involved in conduct amounting to financial crime and a lack of fitness and propriety. The action arose from a scheme run at Dolfin Financial that between 2016 and 2019 helped clients bypass the UK investor‑visa rules; the FCA says Mr Maraj managed the financial aspects of the scheme. He agreed to settle and received a 30% discount on the penalty. The FCA also banned two other former Dolfin executives; one has referred his decision to the Upper Tribunal.

The FCA found that Denisz Andras Nagy, formerly chief executive of Dolfin Financial (UK) Limited, led a scheme (about 2016–2019) that helped clients bypass the Home Office investor‑visa rules by charging fees and creating a false impression that required investments had been made. On 25 August 2026 the FCA fined him £324,800 (after a 30% settlement discount) and imposed a prohibition from performing any function in relation to regulated activities, finding breaches of APER and COCON including failures of integrity, openness and co‑operation and that he was not fit and proper. The FCA said the scheme enabled at least 99 individuals to obtain investor visas and generated at least £35.5m in fees; the notice also records that Nagy and others deliberately concealed the scheme from the FCA and the Home Office.

The FCA fined and banned Demetrios Christos Hadjigeorgiou after finding breaches of APER 6 (Statement of Principle 6: to exercise due skill, care and diligence) and FIT (fitness and propriety requirements) while he was CEO of SVS Securities Plc. The regulator found he allowed customers’ pension money to be put into high‑risk products and failed to challenge a 10% reduction applied to customers’ bond sales, a decision that generated £359,800 for SVS and caused some customers to lose part of their pension savings. He was fined £56,400, given a prohibition order and settled with the FCA by withdrawing his referral to the Upper Tribunal.

The FCA found that Paul Vincent Taylor breached Individual Conduct Rule 1 (must act with integrity) by making false and misleading statements and falsifying documents—including claims he owned a c.€200m bond portfolio—while seeking to acquire a UK bank and Reading Football Club. The regulator fined him £489,000, imposed a prohibition (ban) from regulated activities and concluded he acted dishonestly. Taylor qualified for a 30% settlement discount; without it the penalty would have been £698,600. The FCA’s final notice and press release set out the findings and sanction dates in August 2026.

The FCA fined Esmeralda Toni £121,200 and issued a prohibition after finding she breached Individual Conduct Rule 1 (COCON 2.2.1R) by failing to act with integrity in the wholesale broking sector. The FCA found Toni knowingly assisted Blue Horizon’s then-CEO in creating false documents and misleading statements — including claims about ownership of a €200m bond portfolio — while pursuing attempted acquisitions of a UK bank and Reading Football Club. The conduct took place while she was an executive director at Blue Horizon (Feb 2022–Dec 2025); she agreed to settle the matter and qualified for a 30% discount under FCA procedures (without the discount the penalty would have been £173,100).

On 12 May 2026 the Financial Conduct Authority fined and prohibited Frank Breuer £755,000 for breaches of the Fit and Proper test (FIT), COCON 2.1.1 and APER 1 related to a lack of fitness and propriety and failing to act with integrity as an investment adviser. The FCA found he provided pension and investment advice without the required professional indemnity insurance (since April 2019), failed to pay an Ombudsman award and put customers’ compensation at risk. The penalty includes disgorgement of financial benefit and interest; the FCA imposed both a prohibition from regulated activity and the financial penalty (Final Notice dated 12 May 2026).

The FCA fined Dinosaur Merchant Bank Limited £338,000 for failing to have effective systems and controls to detect and report suspicious trading in its contracts for difference (CFD) business. A new order system introduced in June 2024 led to a sharp rise in CFD trading (about $3.05bn of trades between June and October 2024) that was not captured by the firm’s automated surveillance; DMBL identified the issue in October 2024 but did not fully remedy it until May 2025 and stopped selling CFDs in May 2025. The FCA found breaches of Article 16(2) of UK MAR (the duty to detect and report suspicious orders/transactions), SYSC 6.1.1R (requirement to maintain adequate systems and controls) and Principle 3 (take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs), and applied a 30% cooperation discount (the fine would have been £482,900 without the discount).

The FCA fined Richard John Howson £237,700 on 16 February 2026 for being knowingly concerned in misleading announcements by Carillion and for failures of systems, controls and integrity. The regulator found he acted recklessly and was knowingly concerned in breaches of Article 15 of the Market Abuse Regulation, Listing Rule 1.3.3R, Listing Principle 1 and Premium Listing Principle 2 in the period 1 July 2016 to 10 July 2017 (including announcements on 7 Dec 2016, 1 Mar 2017 and 3 May 2017). Howson withdrew his referral of the FCA’s decision to the Upper Tribunal, which meant the Final Notice was published and the penalty finalised.

The FCA fined Bhavesh Hirani £56,000 on 27 January 2026 for insider dealing and the unlawful disclosure of inside information, breaches of Article 14(a) and 14(c) of the UK Market Abuse Regulation. The regulator found that while interim CFO at Bidstack in December 2021 Hirani passed confidential details of a material deal to a friend (Dipesh Kerai), opened a trading account in that friend’s name and — with his help — bought about 1.3m Bidstack shares ahead of the public announcement. The assessed penalty was £80,000 but Hirani received a 30% settlement discount, reducing the fine to £56,000; the friend made circa £9,200 when the shares rose and his penalty included disgorgement of that profit.

The FCA found that in December 2021 Bhavesh Hirani (then interim CFO at Bidstack) passed confidential inside information about a major deal to his friend Dipesh Kerai. Kerai used an account in his name (funded with about £25,000 of his money) to buy 1.3m Bidstack shares before the announcement and made roughly £9,260 when the price rose; the FCA concluded this was insider dealing (breach of Article 14(a) of the UK Market Abuse Regulation, which prohibits dealing in securities while in possession of inside information). The FCA fined Kerai £52,731 (including £9,260.74 disgorgement plus interest and a penalty reduced by a 30% settlement discount).

The FCA (whose decision was upheld by the Upper Tribunal) found that Darren Antony Reynolds gave dishonest pension transfer advice to members of the British Steel Pension Scheme, encouraged unsuitable transfers and investments, hid high exit fees, falsified documents and obstructed the investigation. He was banned from regulated financial services and fined £2,037,892 for breaching Statement of Principle 1 (which requires firms and individuals to act with integrity). The FCA said over £17.6m has been paid in compensation to more than 470 affected customers and that the Tribunal agreed with the FCA’s penalty calculation; no settlement discount was applied.

The FCA fined former Carillion finance director Richard Adam £232,800 on 7 January 2026 for being knowingly concerned in Carillion’s publication of misleading information. The regulator found he was aware of serious problems in Carillion’s UK construction business but failed to ensure that announcements, or the board and audit committee, were properly informed; the breaches included Article 15 of the Market Abuse Regulation (no false or misleading signals), Listing Rule 1.3.3R (don’t publish misleading information), Listing Principle 1 (have adequate procedures, systems and controls) and Premium Listing Principle 2 (act with integrity). Mr Adam — finance director from April 2007 to 31 December 2016 — withdrew his challenge to the FCA’s decision.

On 7 January 2026 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Zafar Khan £138,900 for being “knowingly concerned” in Carillion’s publication of misleading information in late 2016 and 2017. The FCA found Mr Khan — who had been Carillion’s finance director in 2017 — was aware of serious problems in the company’s UK construction business but failed to ensure announcements, and the board’s oversight, reflected that; he was found to have breached Article 15 of the Market Abuse Regulation (prohibits market manipulation / false or misleading statements), Listing Rule 1.3.3R (do not publish misleading information), Listing Principle 1 (requirement to have adequate procedures, systems and controls) and Premium Listing Principle 2 (requirement to act with integrity). The fine followed Mr Khan’s withdrawal of his challenge to the FCA’s decision.

Russel Gerrity, an oil‑rig consultant, was fined £309,843 by the FCA for insider dealing. Between October 2018 and January 2022 he used non‑public exploration information to trade shares in Chariot Oil & Gas Limited and Eco (Atlantic) Oil & Gas Plc (making a net gain of £128,765 and on one occasion avoiding a loss). The FCA found breaches of Article 14(a) of the UK Market Abuse Regulations; Gerrity accepted the matter and qualified for a 30% stage‑1 settlement discount (the undiscounted penalty would have been £387,448).

In December 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) fined Nationwide Building Society £44,078,500 for weaknesses in its financial crime controls between October 2016 and July 2021. Nationwide did not keep customer due diligence and risk assessments up to date for its personal current account customers, and its transaction monitoring was ineffective; it also knew some customers were running businesses through personal accounts in breach of its terms but had no proper process to manage the extra risk. In one serious case the society missed chances to spot a customer using personal accounts to receive over £27m in fraudulent Covid furlough payments. Nationwide, which had reported the problems itself and cooperated, agreed to settle and received a 30% discount; the fine would otherwise have been £62,969,297.

On 29 October 2025 the FCA prosecuted and convicted Luke Coleman for unlawfully obtaining and disclosing personal data in breach of the Data Protection Act. Coleman, who was employed by Virgin Media O2 and was suspended pending the criminal investigation, sold confidential customer data to a family friend for use in a boiler‑room fraud. The court ordered Coleman to pay a £384 fine, a £38 victim surcharge and £500 towards prosecution costs (total recorded penalty £922).

The FCA fined Neil Sedgwick Dwane £100,281 and prohibited him from working in UK financial services for insider dealing. While working as an adviser to ITM Power in 2022 he had inside information about an announcement planned for 27 October, sold 125,000 shares (his and a family member’s) the day before and then bought 180,000 shares after the price fell, making a £26,575 benefit. The FCA said he was required to obtain ITM’s permission before dealing but did not, and he qualified for a 30% (stage 1) settlement discount. The sanction was for breaches of the Market Abuse Regulation (insider dealing) in the issuer sector and was recorded on the FCA register.

The FCA prosecuted Taunton-based Nicholas Harper. He pleaded guilty on 1 September 2025 to encouraging or assisting an offence under the Data Protection Act; following a retrial at Southwark Crown Court a jury on 19 September 2025 acquitted him of conspiracy to defraud and of carrying on regulated activity without FCA authorisation. Harper was fined £100 and ordered to pay a £30 victim surcharge (total £130). The FCA brought the prosecution; no firm was the subject of the enforcement action.

The FCA found that Diego Urra committed market abuse and market manipulation and failed to act with integrity, concluding he lacked the fitness and propriety required for his role in the investment bank sector. On 5 August 2025 the regulator fined him £223,400 and imposed a prohibition. The action was taken under the Market Abuse Regulations and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The FCA published a Final Notice setting out the breaches and the sanctions.

On 5 August 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) fined Jorge Lopez Gonzalez £100,000 and imposed a prohibition. The FCA’s Final Notice records breaches of the Market Abuse Regulations and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 relating to market abuse/market manipulation, failures to act with integrity and a lack of fitness and propriety in the investment‑bank sector. The regulator is the FCA and the full Final Notice is published by the FCA.

On 5 August 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority fined individual Poojan Sheth £57,600 and imposed a prohibition. The FCA’s Final Notice says Sheth breached the Market Abuse Regulation and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000: conduct included market abuse and market manipulation, failing to act with integrity and a lack of fitness and propriety in the investment bank sector. The action was against the individual (not their employer); full details are in the FCA Final Notice linked below.

The Financial Conduct Authority fined Sigma Broking Limited (FRN 485362) £1,087,300 for breaches of MiFIR and Principle 3 (the requirement to act with due skill, care and diligence). Sigma agreed to resolve the matter through the FCA’s executive settlement procedures and qualified for a 30% discount; without that discount the fine would have been £1,553,300. The action appears on the FCA register dated 2025-07-29 and is recorded in the FCA’s final notice linked below.

On 25 July 2025 the FCA issued a Final Notice fining individual Jean‑Noel Alba £1,049,500 and imposing a prohibition. The notice records breaches of APER 1 and 4 (rules in the Appointed Representatives sourcebook governing obligations of appointed representatives and their oversight) and Individual Conduct Rules 1 and 3 — Rule 1 requires acting with integrity and Rule 3 requires dealing with the FCA openly and cooperatively. The action was taken by the Financial Conduct Authority; the FCA Final Notice is published at the link below.

The Financial Conduct Authority fined James Edward Staley £1,107,307 and prohibited him from holding senior management functions. The FCA’s Final Notice, published following the Upper Tribunal’s decision of 26 June 2025 (which upheld the FCA’s Decision Notice of 30 May 2023), found breaches of Individual Conduct Rules 1 (must act with integrity) and 3 (must be open and cooperative with regulators) and Senior Manager Conduct Rule 4 (must disclose information the FCA would reasonably expect notice of). The action was recorded on the FCA register on 23 July 2025.

On 16 July 2025 the FCA fined Barclays Bank UK PLC £3,093,600 for failures in its account‑opening procedures for a client money account used by WealthTek, concluding the bank had inadequate risk‑management systems. The FCA said Barclays breached Principle 3 (firms must organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively) and SYSC 6.1.1R (requirement to have effective systems and controls). Barclays also agreed to make a voluntary payment of £6,281,757 to WealthTek clients and the FCA said the bank’s extensive co‑operation and that redress were taken into account in reducing the penalty.

On 14 July 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Barclays Bank Plc £39,314,700 for breaching Principle 2 (firms must act with due skill, care and diligence). The FCA found that between 9 January 2015 and 23 April 2021 Barclays failed to identify, assess, monitor and manage adequately the money‑laundering risks arising from the provision of banking services to one corporate banking customer.

The FCA fined individual Markos Theodosi Markou £10,000 and imposed a prohibition, recorded on 10 July 2025. The Final Notice was issued after the Supreme Court refused his application to appeal the Court of Appeal judgment of 17 December 2024. The FCA found he breached Statement of Principle 1 (Integrity) in the mortgages sector—Principle 1 requires approved persons to act with integrity. The sanction was against Mr Markou personally, not a firm.

In July 2025 the FCA fined Monzo Bank £21,091,300 for inadequate anti-financial crime systems and controls between October 2018 and August 2020, and for repeatedly breaching a requirement it had agreed with the regulator (a "VREQ") not to open accounts for high-risk customers between August 2020 and June 2022. Monzo's customer base grew almost tenfold, from around 600,000 in 2018 to over 5.8 million in 2022, but its onboarding checks, customer risk assessments and transaction monitoring did not keep pace: customers were able to open accounts using obviously implausible addresses such as Buckingham Palace, and more than 34,000 high-risk customers were signed up while the restriction was in force. Monzo agreed to settle and qualified for a 30% discount; without it the fine would have been £30,130,475.

On 2 July 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Craig Donaldson £167,325 after finding he was knowingly concerned in a contravention of Listing Rule 1.3.3R. Listing Rule 1.3.3R requires issuers to take reasonable care to ensure that regulatory disclosures are accurate and complete. The FCA’s Final Notice (linked) records the regulator’s findings and the imposed financial penalty against the individual (not his employer).

On 2 July 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority fined David Arden £100,950. The FCA’s Final Notice says Mr Arden was found to have been knowingly concerned in contravention of Listing Rule 1.3.3R. Listing Rule 1.3.3R requires issuers to take reasonable care that regulatory disclosures are accurate and not misleading.

On 30 May 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority issued a Final Notice finding that Toni Fox breached PRIN 1 (which requires firms and individuals to act with integrity and due skill, care and diligence) and provided inappropriate pension transfer advice. The FCA fined her £567,584, withdrew her regulatory approvals and imposed a prohibition order. The action is recorded on the FCA register and the regulator's Final Notice sets out the findings and sanctions.

On 30 May 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority fined individual adviser David Brian Price £465,415 after finding he provided inappropriate pension transfer advice and breached PRIN 1. PRIN 1 requires firms and individuals to act with integrity and due skill, care and diligence and to treat customers fairly. The FCA’s Final Notice also withdrew his regulatory approvals and imposed a prohibition order; the notice (linked below) gives the FCA’s full findings and the period of the misconduct.

The FCA fined the London Metal Exchange £9,245,900 for breaches of REC 2.5.1 (para 3(1) and 3(2)(h)) and MiFID RTS 7 (Article 18(3) and (4)). Broadly, the FCA found the LME failed to have in place and operate adequate arrangements, systems and controls a recognised body must have to prevent or address disorderly trading and to apply suspension/removal safeguards. The penalty is recorded as 'after settlement' on the FCA register (the sanction was agreed with the regulator); the FCA final notice sets out the factual and temporal detail of the breaches.

The FCA fined Mako Financial Markets Partnership LLP £1,662,700 after finding that between 16 December 2013 and 16 November 2015 the firm did not have, and did not adequately apply, policies and procedures to identify and address the risk of being used to facilitate financial crime and money laundering in relation to business introduced by the Solo Group. The regulator concluded Mako breached Principle 2 (firms must act with due skill, care and diligence) and Principle 3 (firms must take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively). Mako agreed to resolve all issues of fact and liability; the FCA's action took effect on 17 February 2025 and is set out in the Final Notice linked below.

The FCA fined Infinox Capital Limited £99,200 for failing to submit any MiFIR transaction reports for single‑stock CFD trades executed through one corporate brokerage account between 1 October 2022 and 31 March 2023. Article 26(1) of MiFIR requires trading counterparties to report details of transactions to the relevant regulator; Infinox admitted liability and agreed a settlement, qualifying for a 30% discount. The FCA published a Final Notice on the matter (link below).

The FCA found that Arian Financial LLP failed to have effective anti‑financial‑crime systems and controls between 29 January 2015 and 29 September 2015, putting the firm at risk of being used to support fraudulent trading and money‑laundering for clients of four authorised entities (the Solo Group). The FCA imposed a financial penalty but Arian admitted liability and referred the proposed fine to the Upper Tribunal; the Tribunal decided on 11 November 2024 to reduce the FCA’s penalty from £744,745 to £288,962.52, and the FCA’s Final Notice took effect on 9 January 2025. (Principle 2 requires firms to conduct business with due skill, care and diligence; Principle 3 requires firms to take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs with adequate risk management and systems.)

The FCA fined and prohibited Philip Pryke for giving unsuitable pension transfer advice, finding breaches of APER 1 and the Fitness and Propriety (FIT) rules. The regulator imposed a financial penalty of £1,377,968 and a prohibition order; the FCA's Final Notice sets out the detailed findings. The FCA register entry is dated 28 November 2024. No tribunal appeal, settlement discount or redress to customers is recorded in the register entry provided.

On 26 November 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined András Sebők £123,500. The FCA’s Final Notice says Sebők, a PDMR (person discharging managerial responsibilities), breached the Market Abuse Regulations by trading during closed periods and failing to make required trade disclosures. The regulator’s Final Notice (linked below) gives the full details of the breaches and the penalty.

On 25 November 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Barclays Bank Plc £10,000,000 for breaches of the Listing Rules in the issuer sector, specifically for failing to disclose information the rules require. The FCA issued a Final Notice setting out the breaches and imposed the financial penalty. The regulator's Final Notice (link below) contains the detailed findings; I did not find independent press coverage in the searches I ran.

I can’t open the FCA final notice link you gave because I don’t have access to the internet from here. To produce the requested plain‑English explainer (what went wrong, who was penalised, which regulator action, the period, the exact penalty and any settlement or redress), I need the FCA final notice or reputable press reports. Please either allow me to retrieve the FCA notice and press coverage, or paste the text of the final notice or key extracts here and I will write the explainer.

The FCA issued a Final Notice on 14 November 2024 fining Martin Paul Cooke £6,020 and imposing a prohibition. The notice records breaches of COCON 2.2.1R — the conduct rule requiring individuals to act with integrity — in the Investment Adviser sector. The action names Cooke (an individual), not his employer; the FCA imposed a financial penalty and a prohibition, and the FCA register entry does not record any customer redress, settlement discount or appeal outcome.

On 14 November 2024 the FCA issued a Final Notice fining Craig Buchan £6,037 and imposing a prohibition. The Notice records breaches of COCON 2.2.1R (Individual Conduct Rule 1) for failing to act with integrity in the investment adviser sector. COCON 2.2.1R requires an individual to act with integrity; the FCA imposed both the financial penalty and a prohibition as its sanction.

On 12 November 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Metro Bank Plc £16,675,200 for breaching Principle 3 of the FCA’s Principles for Businesses between 6 June 2016 and 17 December 2020. Principle 3 requires a firm to take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs responsibly and effectively, with adequate risk‑management systems. The FCA’s Final Notice setting out the authority’s findings is published on the FCA website.

On 11 November 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority issued a Final Notice against individual Leigh Mackey, fining him £1,102,879 and imposing a prohibition. The FCA found breaches of APER 1, APER 4 and COCON in the General Insurance and Protection sector: specifically, that Mackey failed to act with integrity and failed to be open and co‑operative. The Final Notice sets out the FCA’s factual findings and the enforcement outcome; the action was against the individual, not his employer.

On 27 October 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Kristo Käärmann £350,000. The FCA’s Final Notice records a breach of COCON 2.2.4R SC4 – a failure to disclose appropriately information to the regulator. Rule SC4 requires senior conduct‑rules staff to promptly tell the FCA information it would be reasonable to assume is of material significance. The FCA imposed a financial penalty and published a Final Notice setting out the decision.

The FCA’s Final Notice (21 October 2024) says Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) Limited breached PRIN 3, PRIN 6, PRIN 7, CONC and DISP in how it treated consumers in financial difficulty under consumer credit arrangements. PRIN 3 requires firms to organise and control their affairs responsibly; PRIN 6 requires them to pay due regard to customers’ interests; PRIN 7 requires clear, fair and not misleading communications; CONC covers consumer credit conduct rules; DISP covers complaints handling. The FCA imposed a financial penalty of £5,397,600. The regulator’s Final Notice is published at the FCA URL supplied by the firm’s register entry.

On 9 October 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined TSB Bank Plc £10,910,500 after finding breaches of PRIN 3 and PRIN 6 related to the unfair treatment of customers in its retail banking, mortgage and consumer credit businesses. PRIN 3 requires firms to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively (management and control); PRIN 6 requires firms to pay due regard to customers’ interests and treat them fairly. The FCA’s Final Notice records the breaches and the financial penalty of £10,910,500.

The FCA fined Starling Bank £28,959,426 for failings in its financial crime systems and controls between December 2019 and November 2023 — the regulator's first fine against a digital challenger bank. Starling's customer numbers grew from about 43,000 in 2017 to 3.6 million in 2023 but its safeguards did not keep up: in January 2023 it discovered that since 2017 its automated screening had been checking customers against only a fraction of the full financial sanctions list, and it breached a requirement agreed with the FCA in 2021 not to open accounts for high-risk customers by opening over 54,000 accounts for around 49,000 such customers between September 2021 and November 2023. The FCA described the bank's controls as "shockingly lax". Starling agreed to settle and received a 30% discount; the fine would otherwise have been £40,959,426.

The FCA found that Alec John Cuthbert breached APER Statement of Principle 1 (which requires individuals to act with integrity) and was not fit and proper because he recklessly designed and operated a pension-transfer advice model. The regulator imposed a prohibition (a ban from regulated activity) and fined him £91,693. The action is recorded in the FCA’s Final Notice dated 30 August 2024.

The FCA fined PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP £15,000,000 on 16 August 2024 for failing to act appropriately on information in its audit work relating to suspected fraudulent activity at London Capital & Finance plc. The breach was of Regulation 2 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Communications by Auditors) Regulations 2001, which requires auditors to notify the regulator when they have reasonable grounds to suspect relevant wrongdoing. The FCA imposed a financial penalty in its Final Notice; the notice itself records the regulatory breach and penalty.

The FCA found that Martin Christopher Sarl lacked honesty and integrity in his role in the General Insurance and Protection sector, breaching Statement of Principle 1 (which requires approved persons to act with integrity) and FIT 2.1 (which requires honesty and integrity for fitness and propriety). On 14 August 2024 the FCA issued a Final Notice imposing a financial penalty of £5,021 and also imposed a prohibition and withdrawal of his approval. The action was taken by the Financial Conduct Authority and no customer redress or appeals are recorded in the notice provided.

The Financial Conduct Authority fined FOREX TB Limited (FRN 729874) £276,100 for breaches of Principle 6 and section 20 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. Principle 6 requires firms to pay due regard to customers’ interests and treat them fairly; section 20 FSMA requires firms to operate only in accordance with the permissions they have (the FCA found the firm failed to do so while operating under the Temporary Permissions Regime). The penalty was imposed on 9 August 2024; the FCA published a Final Notice setting out the breaches and the sanction.

On 26 July 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Anthony Dale Cuming £1,691,259 and imposed a prohibition. The FCA’s Final Notice found he breached APER 1 in connection with his conduct in the pensions sector (the action was taken against the individual, not his employer). The regulator’s Final Notice sets out the misconduct and the sanction.

On 26 July 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined and prohibited Kyle Anthony Jones for breaches of APER 1 relating to his conduct in the pensions sector. The FCA imposed a financial penalty of £443,153 and a prohibition, as set out in the regulator’s Final Notice. The FCA notice is the primary source of the action; no additional reporting is supplied here.

On 26 July 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Steven Harbinder Singh Sahota £1,782,343 and imposed a prohibition. The FCA’s Final Notice records breaches of APER 1 relating to his conduct in the pensions sector; the regulator was the sole enforcer in this action. The FCA Final Notice is the source for these outcomes.

On 23 July 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined CB Payments Limited £3,503,546. The FCA’s Final Notice records that CB Payments breached Statement of Principle 2 by failing to comply with a voluntary requirement (a VREQ) imposed on the firm in the e‑money sector. Statement of Principle 2 requires firms to act with due skill, care and diligence. The FCA imposed the financial penalty set out in its Final Notice (no further outcomes are recorded here).

The FCA fined individual Kulvir Virk £215,500 and issued a prohibition order on 19 June 2024 for misconduct in the pensions sector. The regulator’s Final Notice records breaches of PRIN 1 (the requirement to act with integrity) and PRIN 6 (the requirement to exercise due care, skill and diligence). The action names Virk as the subject (an individual, not a firm) and records the financial penalty and the prohibition order as the regulatory outcomes.

The FCA fined Citigroup Global Markets Limited (FRN 124384) £27,766,200 in a final notice dated 17 May 2024 for breaches of Principles 2 (skill, care and diligence) and 3 (management and control) and for breaching MAR Rule 7A.3.2 relating to algorithmic trading. On the same date the Prudential Regulation Authority issued a Final Notice to CGML, imposing a £33,880,000 penalty for breaches of Fundamental Rules 2, 5 and 6 and PRA algorithmic trading rules; CGML settled during the PRA’s Discount Stage and received a 30% settlement discount (the undiscounted PRA penalty would have been £48,400,000). The FCA and PRA actions took effect on 17 May 2024.

On 22 April 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined James William Edward Lewis £120,300 and imposed a prohibition order after finding he had failed to act with due care, skill and integrity. The FCA’s Final Notice (which you linked) contains the full facts, the period of the misconduct, and the FCA’s reasoning. I don’t currently have access to the FCA website to retrieve the Final Notice text; if you paste key excerpts or allow me to fetch the notice I will extract the concrete details (what exactly went wrong, Lewis’s role/employer, the period of misconduct, and any other consequences).

On 13 February 2024 the Financial Conduct Authority fined individual Floris Jakobus Huisamen £31,800 for breaches of the Conduct of Business Sourcebook (CoBS) relating to financial promotions in the issuer sector. The action was taken against the individual (not his employer) and the FCA’s Final Notice records a financial penalty was imposed. The FCA notice is the regulator’s published outcome; no tribunal appeal, redress to customers or settlement discount is recorded on the FCA register entry provided.

On 30 November 2023 the Financial Conduct Authority issued an infringement decision finding that Hafiz Bros Travel & Money Transfer Limited breached the Competition Act 1998. The FCA imposed a financial penalty of £11,200 on the firm. The regulator’s non-confidential final notice setting out the decision is published by the FCA.

On 30 November 2023 the Financial Conduct Authority issued an infringement decision fining LCC Trans‑Sending Limited £139,500 for breaching the Competition Act 1998. The FCA’s final notice (infringement decision) sets out the factual findings and the reasons for the penalty; the notice is published at the FCA link provided. The action recorded on the FCA register is an infringement decision (financial penalty) under the Competition Act regime.

On 30 November 2023 the Financial Conduct Authority issued an infringement decision (case CA98.2020.01) fining DOLLAR EAST (INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL & MONEY TRANSFER) LTD £3,600 for breaching the Competition Act 1998. The FCA published a final (non-confidential) infringement decision notice setting out the finding and the penalty. No other consequences (redress, discounts, appeals) are recorded in the register entry provided.

On 13 October 2023 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Equifax Limited £11,164,400 after finding failings linked to outsourcing data processing to an intragroup entity that experienced a data breach. The FCA’s Final Notice records risk‑management failings (breach of PRIN 3 — firms must organise and control their affairs effectively and have adequate risk management) and failures in treating customers fairly and in communicating information clearly after the breach. The FCA imposed the stated financial penalty; the Final Notice is published by the regulator.

On 29 September 2023 the Financial Conduct Authority imposed a £6,470,600 financial penalty on ADM Investor Services International Limited (FRN 148474) under section 206 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The penalty was for deficient anti‑money‑laundering systems and controls at the firm during the period 30 September 2014 to 31 October 2016. The FCA's Final Notice on the action is published on its website.

The FCA's final notice (published 28 September 2023) found that Andrew John Deeney gave unsuitable advice to clients about transferring defined benefit (DB) pension benefits. The regulator concluded he breached APER 1 (which requires approved persons to act with integrity) and imposed a financial penalty and a prohibition on him. The financial penalty recorded was £397,400 and the prohibition prevents him from performing regulated activities as set out in the notice.

Bastion Capital London Ltd (in liquidation) was fined £2,452,700 by the Financial Conduct Authority for breaches of Principle 2 (firms must conduct business with due skill, care and diligence) and Principle 3 (firms must take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively, including adequate risk-management systems). The FCA’s action related to conduct between January 2014 and September 2015 and the penalty was imposed on 12 July 2023. The action is recorded in the FCA’s final notice for the firm.

Paul Steel, an individual adviser, was fined £3,694,400 and prohibited from regulated activity by the FCA. The regulator’s Final Notice (published 4 July 2023) says he breached APER 1, 2 and 4 and COCON 1 and 3 by providing unsuitable advice about transferring defined‑benefit pension rights. The action was taken against Mr Steel personally and included both a financial penalty and a prohibition.

The FCA’s Final Notice (26 June 2023) says Mark Antony Abley gave unsuitable defined‑benefit pension transfer advice and breached APER 2 (the requirement to act with due skill, care and diligence). The regulator imposed a financial penalty of £106,100 and a partial prohibition restricting his regulated activity. The action relates to failings in pensions transfer advice under the APER regime; the Final Notice sets out the FCA’s findings and sanctions.

The FCA found that Metro Bank Plc failed to comply with Listing Rule 1.3.3 (which requires that misleading information must not be published) in an announcement dated 24 October 2018. The FCA decided to impose a financial penalty on 10 November 2022 and issued its Final Notice on 8 December 2022; Metro Bank did not refer the matter to the Upper Tribunal. The regulator’s Final Notice is published on the FCA website.

The FCA imposed a fine of £531,600 on Sigma Broking Limited in a Final Notice dated 4 October 2022 for failing to submit required reports: 56,000 contracts-for-difference (CFD) transaction reports and 97 suspicious-activity reports. The action was taken by the Financial Conduct Authority and is recorded on the FCA register. The FCA register excerpt and Final Notice record the penalty; the provided register entry does not mention any customer redress, a settlement discount, or an appeal.

On 19 August 2022 the FCA fined Citigroup Global Markets Limited £12,553,800 for failures in its market‑abuse surveillance. The FCA found CGML breached Principle 2 (which requires firms to conduct business with due skill, care and diligence) between 2 November 2015 and 18 January 2018, and breached Article 16(2) of the Market Abuse Regulation (which requires firms to establish and maintain effective arrangements, systems and procedures to detect and report suspicious orders and transactions) between 3 July 2016 and 18 January 2018. The FCA set out its findings and the penalty in a Final Notice published on its website.

The FCA fined Barclays Bank £783,800 in February 2022 for weak oversight of its business customer Premier FX, a small payments firm for which Barclays was the sole UK banker. Premier FX collapsed in 2018 after the death of its sole director, when it emerged it had been taking deposits it was not authorised to take and had not kept client money separate, leaving 167 customers — mostly British expats in Spain and Portugal — with losses of just over £10 million. The FCA found Barclays failed to act with due skill, care and diligence: it did not check that Premier FX's real activity matched what it expected, and it missed signs that the firm's internal controls were deficient. Barclays settled early for a 30% discount and voluntarily paid £10,076,943.75 so that every customer with an accepted claim got all their money back.

On 21 December 2021 the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) issued a Final Notice imposing a financial penalty of £5,376,000 on Metro Bank plc. Metro Bank settled during the PRA’s Discount Stage and therefore qualified for a 30% settlement discount; without that discount the penalty would have been £7,680,000. The PRA’s Final Notice on the Bank of England website sets out the reasons for the penalty; the FCA register entry does not reproduce those reasons and does not record any customer redress or tribunal appeal.

In December 2020 the FCA fined Barclays Bank UK, Barclays Bank and Clydesdale Financial Services a combined £26,056,400 for the poor treatment of consumer credit customers who fell behind on repayments or got into financial difficulty between April 2014 and December 2018. Barclays failed to have proper conversations with struggling customers to understand why they were in arrears, did not properly assess their circumstances, and as a result offered repayment plans that were unaffordable or unsustainable — breaching the FCA's rules requiring firms to treat customers fairly and to organise their affairs responsibly. Barclays had already identified around 1.5 million affected customer accounts and paid them more than £273 million in redress. It did not dispute the findings and settled for a 30% discount, without which the fine would have been £37,223,500.

On 15 December 2020 the Financial Conduct Authority issued a Final Notice fining Barclays Bank UK PLC, Barclays Bank PLC and Clydesdale Financial Services Limited after finding that between 1 April 2014 and 31 December 2018 the firms failed to treat business and retail customers in arrears or financial difficulty with forbearance and due consideration. The FCA said the firms breached Principle 6 (must pay due regard to customers’ interests and treat them fairly), Principle 3 (must organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively) and CONC rules on treating customers in default or arrears. The FCA action took effect on 15 December 2020; the regulator’s Final Notice is at the URL you provided. The FCA register entry and Final Notice set out the breaches and the period examined.

The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) issued a Final Notice to Goldman Sachs International (GSI) that took effect on 22 October 2020 and imposed a financial penalty of £48,308,400. GSI settled during the PRA’s Discount Stage and therefore qualified for a 30% settlement discount under the PRA Settlement Policy; without that discount the penalty would have been £69,012,000. The FCA register entry refers readers to the PRA’s Final Notice on the Bank of England website for the PRA’s reasons; the register text provided does not set out the misconduct details itself. I can’t access the PRA Final Notice or press coverage right now to provide the regulator’s full findings or contemporaneous reporting.

The FCA fined Goldman Sachs International £48,308,400 for risk‑management failures connected to 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB). The breaches related to the firm’s role in three fund‑raising transactions for 1MDB between 1 February 2012 and 3 February 2016 and were judged to have breached Principle 2 (skill, care and diligence) and Principle 3 (firms must organise and control their affairs responsibly and have adequate risk systems). Goldman Sachs International agreed to settle the matter and qualified for a 30% executive settlement discount (the penalty would have been £69,012,000 without the discount); the FCA action took effect on 22 October 2020.

On 11 June 2020 the FCA fined Lloyds Bank, Bank of Scotland and The Mortgage Business — all part of Lloyds Banking Group — £64,046,800 for their handling of mortgage customers who fell into arrears between April 2011 and December 2015. The banks' systems and procedures meant call handlers often did not gather enough information about a customer's finances to judge what they could actually afford, so repayment arrangements were set that were unrealistic and risked making customers' difficulties worse. Around 526,000 customers had already received about £300 million under a redress scheme the group set up in 2017. The banks did not dispute the findings and qualified for a 30% discount; the fine would otherwise have been £91,495,400, and at the time it was the largest FCA penalty on a high street lender since 2015.

Between 19 June 2014 and 31 December 2018 Citigroup’s UK entities failed to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively, submitted incomplete or inaccurate notifications to the regulator, and (for the branches) failed to provide required branch information to the PRA. The Prudential Regulation Authority (part of the Bank of England) fined Citigroup Global Markets Limited, Citibank N.A. London Branch and Citibank Europe Plc UK branch £43,890,000 under section 206 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The PRA’s final notice is published on the Bank of England website.

In June 2019 the FCA fined Bank of Scotland £45.5 million for failing to be open with the regulator about suspected fraud at HBOS's Reading-based Impaired Assets office, where a team led by Lynden Scourfield had been pushing struggling small businesses towards outside consultants who stripped their assets for personal gain. The bank first identified suspicious behaviour in early 2007 — including that Scourfield had been approving lending beyond his authority for three years — but did not fully disclose its suspicions to the then regulator, the Financial Services Authority, until July 2009, and the FCA found there was insufficient challenge or scrutiny "from top to bottom" of the organisation. The FCA said the delay hampered investigations by both the regulator and Thames Valley Police. The bank agreed to settle and received a 30% discount, cutting the fine by almost £20 million; the FCA also banned four individuals involved in the fraud.

The FCA fined Goldman Sachs International £34,300,700 on 27 March 2019 for failures in its transaction reporting. The Final Notice says the firm breached SUP 17 between 5 November 2007 and 31 March 2017, and breached SUP 15 and Principle 3 between 5 November 2007 and 31 March 2015, in relation to its transaction reporting obligations. Principle 3 requires a firm to take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs responsibly and effectively, with adequate risk management systems. Goldman Sachs agreed to resolve the matter and qualified for a 30% executive settlement discount; without that discount the penalty would have been £49,063,900.

The FCA found that UBS breached Handbook rules on regulatory reporting (SUP 17) between 5 November 2007 and 24 May 2017, and breached SUP 15 and Principle 3 between 5 November 2007 and 31 July 2014, in relation to its transaction‑reporting obligations. The FCA imposed a fine of £27,599,400, taking effect on 18 March 2019; UBS agreed to settle and therefore received a 30% (stage 1) executive settlement discount (the undiscounted penalty would have been £39,427,795). Principle 3 requires firms to take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively; SUP 15 and SUP 17 are Handbook provisions covering notifications to the FCA and regulatory/transaction reporting obligations respectively.

On 11 May 2018 the Financial Conduct Authority imposed a £321,200 penalty on Mr James Edward Staley for breaching Individual Conduct Rule 2 (the duty to act with due skill, care and diligence). The FCA found Mr Staley failed to act with due skill, care and diligence in the way he responded to an anonymous letter received by Barclays in June 2016. The action was taken against Mr Staley personally; the Final Notice on the FCA website sets out the regulator’s reasons. The Final Notice does not record any settlement discount, customer redress, or an appeal in relation to this penalty.

The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) issued a Final Notice on 19 November 2014 fining The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, National Westminster Bank Plc and Ulster Bank Ltd £14,000,000 for failures in IT risk management between 1 August 2010 and 10 July 2012. The PRA found the Group‑wide Technology Services function did not manage or plan changes to IT systems adequately, the IT-specific 'three lines of defence' did not control IT risks effectively, and the group had a limited understanding of IT operational risk. The breach was of the FSA’s Principle 3 (now PRA Fundamental Rule 6) — i.e. the requirement to have adequate systems and controls to identify and manage risks. The FCA register records this action on 5 February 2016.

The FCA fined Barclays Bank £72,069,400 in November 2015 over a £1.88 billion structured investment it arranged in 2011 and 2012 for a group of ultra-wealthy clients who were politically exposed persons, and who should therefore have been subject to enhanced checks. Barclays nicknamed it an "elephant deal" because of its size, but rather than applying its normal anti-money-laundering procedures it cut corners to take the clients on quickly and keep the business. The FCA found Barclays failed to act with due skill, care and diligence between May 2011 and November 2014. The penalty comprised £52.3 million of revenue the bank earned from the deal plus a £19.8 million fine; Barclays settled early for a 30% discount, without which the total would have been £80,542,000. At the time it was the largest financial crime penalty ever imposed by the FCA or its predecessor.

On 4 June 2015 the Financial Conduct Authority fined Lloyds Bank plc, Bank of Scotland plc and Black Horse Limited (LBG) £117,430,600 for breaching Principle 6 (Customers’ interests) in their handling of Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) complaints between 5 March 2012 and 28 May 2013. The FCA found LBG assessed complaints on more than 2.3 million PPI policies and rejected 37%, using an “Overriding Principle” that assumed sales processes were compliant, failing to take root‑cause analysis into account and sometimes issuing rejection letters that may have discouraged customers from pursuing valid complaints. LBG agreed an early settlement and received a 30% (Stage 1) discount; without that discount the penalty would have been £167,758,035.

The FCA fined Lloyds Bank plc, Bank of Scotland plc and Black Horse Limited £117,430,600 for treating customers unfairly when handling PPI complaints between 5 March 2012 and 28 May 2013. The regulator found complaint-handling guidance—the so-called 'Overriding Principle'—directed staff to assume sales processes were compliant and that root-cause findings were not taken into account, which led to many valid complaints being rejected; LBG assessed complaints on more than 2.3 million PPI policies and rejected 37% of them. LBG qualified for a 30% early settlement discount (Stage 1), so the penalty was reduced from £167,758,035 to £117,430,600. The breach was of Principle 6 (Customers' interests), which requires firms to pay due regard to their customers' interests and treat them fairly.

On 20 May 2015 the FCA fined Barclays Bank £284,432,000 — then the largest penalty ever imposed by the FCA or its predecessor the FSA — for failing to control its London foreign exchange business between 1 January 2008 and 15 October 2013. Barclays traders formed tight-knit groups with traders at other banks in electronic chat rooms, sharing confidential client information and colluding to move benchmark exchange rates in their favour, putting the bank's interests ahead of clients and the wider market. Because Barclays had not joined the five other banks that settled with the FCA in November 2014, it received only a 20% discount; the fine would otherwise have been £355,540,000. The same day Barclays reached settlements with US authorities that took its total forex-related penalties to around $2.4 billion.

The FCA fined Aviva Investors Global Services Limited £17,607,000 for failures in management and control and conflicts-of-interest rules and breaches of Conduct of Business sourcebook (COBS) rules. The firm failed to put in place adequate systems and controls to manage conflicts created by running hedge funds with high performance fees alongside other funds, creating incentives and a weak control environment that allowed two traders to delay trade bookings, misallocate trades and cherry‑pick in May 2013. Aviva Investors paid £135,000,000 compensation to eight impacted funds, and qualified for a 30% early‑settlement discount, so the undiscounted penalty would have been £25,152,900; the Final Notice was published by the FCA on 2015-02-24.

On 20 November 2014 the FCA fined Royal Bank of Scotland, NatWest and Ulster Bank £42 million for the IT meltdown of June 2012, when a software compatibility problem in the banks' systems left more than 6.5 million UK customers unable to use online banking, see accurate balances at cash machines or make payments — in some cases for several weeks. The FCA found the immediate cause was a software compatibility problem, but the underlying failure was that the banks had not put in place adequate systems and controls to identify and manage their exposure to IT risk, breaching the rule that firms must organise and control their affairs responsibly. The banks settled at an early stage and received a 30% discount. In the first joint enforcement action of its kind, the Bank of England's Prudential Regulation Authority separately fined the banks £14 million for the same incident, taking the total to £56 million.

The FCA fined UBS AG £233,814,000 for serious control failures in its Zurich G10 spot foreign-exchange voice trading desk. Between 1 January 2008 and 15 October 2013 the bank failed to organise and control the desk properly (breaching Principle 3), allowing traders to try to manipulate WMR and ECB fix rates, attempt to trigger clients’ stop‑loss orders for UBS’s benefit, and share confidential client information with traders at other firms. The FCA’s Final Notice (11 November 2014) says UBS cooperated, had received whistleblowing reports and internal warnings, and was undertaking remediation and cultural changes; the notice also refers to UBS’s prior LIBOR/EURIBOR action in December 2012.

On 12 November 2014 the FCA fined The Royal Bank of Scotland £217 million as part of a record £1.1 billion settlement with five banks (RBS, Citibank, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase and UBS) over failings in their spot foreign exchange trading. Between 1 January 2008 and 15 October 2013 ineffective controls allowed traders to share confidential information about client orders in chat rooms and coordinate their trading to manipulate benchmark exchange rates, putting the banks' interests ahead of their clients and the wider financial system. RBS settled early and received a 30% discount; without it the fine would have been £310 million. The bank also paid $290 million to the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission the same day, suspended three employees and launched a review of the conduct of more than 50 current and former traders.

The FCA imposed a £37,745,000 penalty on Barclays Bank plc for failures in how it organised and controlled safe custody arrangements and for not arranging adequate protection for client safe custody assets. The breaches (of Principles 3 and 10 and multiple CASS rules) related to about £16.5bn of client safe custody assets held or arranged for between 1 November 2007 and 24 January 2012. Barclays qualified for a 30% early‑settlement discount, so the headline penalty was reduced from £53,921,619 to £37,745,000. The FCA said the failings left clients at risk of extra costs, lengthy delays or loss of assets had Barclays become insolvent during the Relevant Period.

On 28 July 2014 the FCA fined Lloyds Bank plc and Bank of Scotland plc a total of £105,000,000 (split £52.5m each), a figure discounted from an original aggregate penalty of £150,000,000 for early settlement. The FCA found the firms breached Principle 3 (firms must take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs) and Principle 5 (firms must observe proper standards of market conduct) by manipulating submissions used to calculate two benchmark reference rates — the sterling Repo Rate and LIBOR — in order to seek to influence those rates. The penalty and the settlement discount are recorded in the FCA final notice dated 28 July 2014.

On 28 July 2014 the Financial Conduct Authority imposed a combined £105,000,000 penalty on Lloyds Bank plc and Bank of Scotland plc for manipulating submissions to two benchmark rates (the Repo Rate and LIBOR), in breach of Principles 3 and 5. The penalty was split equally between the two firms (so £52,500,000 each) and was discounted from £150,000,000 for early settlement. Principle 5 requires firms to observe proper standards of market conduct; Principle 3 requires firms to take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs responsibly. The FCA final notice is linked below; the register entry does not state the exact period of the misconduct.

On 23 May 2014 the FCA fined Barclays Bank PLC £26,033,500 for breaches of Principles 3 and 8 relating to the London Gold Fixing. The FCA found that between 7 June 2004 and 21 March 2013 Barclays failed to manage conflicts of interest and had inadequate systems, controls, policies and training around staff participation in the Gold Fixing while the bank also sold options that referenced the fixed gold price. The regulator highlighted a specific incident on 28 June 2012 when a Barclays trader who was responsible for risk-managing a customer option participated in the 3:00pm Gold Fixing and placed orders intended to increase the chance the fix would be below a level, putting his interests ahead of the customer’s. The FCA noted Barclays did not formally record Gold Fixing orders until 5 February 2013 and did not identify Gold Fixing transactions separately from spot trades until 21 March 2013; the fine was reduced from £37,190,800 because of a Stage 1 settlement discount.

The FCA fined Forex Capital Markets Limited and FXCM Securities Limited (together “FXCM Ltd”) £4,000,000 on 24 February 2014 for breaching Principles 6 and 11. Between 1 August 2006 and 17 December 2010 FXCM Ltd treated customers unfairly by not passing on favourable price movements in rolling spot FX trades and instead retaining the benefit, reducing customers’ ability to profit. Between July 2010 and August 2011 the firm failed to be open and co‑operative by not disclosing to the FCA that US authorities had opened an investigation into the group and that the group later settled and paid redress for asymmetric pricing. FXCM settled at an early stage and received a 20% settlement discount (the uncapped penalty would have been £5,000,000).

The FCA fined Lloyds TSB Bank plc and Bank of Scotland plc £28,038,800 on 10 December 2013 for breaches of Principle 3 (firms must take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively, with adequate risk management systems). Between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2012 the banks had serious failings in systems and controls over sales incentives for branch advisers: pay structures (variable salaries, bonus thresholds) and a bias towards protection products created a material risk of inappropriate advised sales. Monitoring and governance were inadequate (including a flawed competency control that allowed advisers with identified sales issues to receive pay rises/bonuses) and senior management collectively failed to give incentives robust oversight. The firms settled early and received a 20% settlement discount (Stage 2), and are reviewing sales by higher‑risk advisers and will provide customer redress where appropriate.

On 10 December 2013 the FCA fined Lloyds TSB Bank plc and Bank of Scotland plc a combined £28,038,800 for breaches of Principle 3 (firms must act with due skill, care and diligence). The breaches arose from serious deficiencies in systems and controls over financial incentives for branch advisers who sold protection and investment products between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2012 — incentives included variable pay, bonus thresholds and a strong bias toward protection sales that created a significant risk of inappropriate recommendations. The firms settled early and received a 20% settlement discount (the penalty would otherwise have been £35,048,500); they are reviewing sales by higher‑risk advisers in the Relevant Period and will provide redress to customers where appropriate.

On 15 February 2013 the Financial Services Authority (the FSA, the FCA’s predecessor) imposed a final notice and a £4,315,000 penalty on Lloyds TSB Bank Plc, Lloyds TSB Scotland Plc and Bank of Scotland (together Lloyds Banking Group) for failing to pay PPI redress promptly to complainants between 5 May 2011 and 9 March 2012. The FSA said LBG sent 582,206 decision letters agreeing to pay redress but failed to make payments within its 28‑day target in up to 140,209 (24%) cases; 24,589 cases had inadvertently dropped out of the payments process and remedial action was required. The FSA found breaches of Principle 3 (firms must take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs, including adequate risk management systems) and DISP 1.4.1R(5) (firms must comply promptly with offers of redress accepted by complainants); LBG agreed an early settlement (a 30% Stage 1 discount) and carried out a full reconciliation, paid interest at 8% p.a. where appropriate, and implemented process improvements including a PPI payment validation tool.

On 15 February 2013 the FSA (the FCA's predecessor) imposed a single Final Notice fining Lloyds TSB Bank Plc, Lloyds TSB Scotland Plc and Bank of Scotland Plc (together Lloyds Banking Group) £4,315,000 for failing to pay PPI redress promptly during 5 May 2011–9 March 2012. The firms had sent 582,206 decision letters agreeing redress but failed to make payment within 28 days in up to 140,209 (24%) cases; 24,589 payments inadvertently dropped out of the process and required remedial action. The FSA found breaches of Principle 3 (must organise and control affairs responsibly and effectively) and DISP 1.4.1R(5) (must comply promptly with accepted offers of redress); Lloyds settled early and received a 30% executive‑settlement discount (the fine would otherwise have been £6,164,327), carried out a full reconciliation, paid interest where appropriate and implemented process fixes including a PPI payment validation tool.

On 8 February 2013 the FSA fined UBS AG £9,450,000 for failures in its sales of the AIG Life Premier Access Bond Enhanced Variable Rate Fund (sales 1 Dec 2003–15 Sep 2008) and in handling related complaints (15 Sep 2008–20 Sep 2011). The FSA found UBS did inadequate due diligence and monitoring of the fund, had weak sales processes and adviser training, failed to record or review customers’ risk/tolerance or to send suitability reports, misdescribed the fund as a cash/money‑market product, and assessed complaints unfairly — breaching Principle 9 (take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs) and Principle 6 (treat customers fairly). UBS settled early and received a 30% (Stage 1) settlement discount (the undiscounted penalty would have been £13,500,000); it agreed a redress programme estimated at about £10m. At the fund’s suspension on 15 September 2008, 565 UBS customers (618 policies) had c.£816m invested; the FSA’s review of 33 sales found 19 mis‑sold and a further 12 at considerable risk of being unsuitable.

On 6 February 2013 the Financial Services Authority (the FSA) imposed a £87.5m penalty on The Royal Bank of Scotland plc for misconduct relating to LIBOR. The FSA found that between January 2006 and March 2012 RBS breached Principle 3 (firms must establish and maintain adequate risk management systems and controls) and that between October 2006 and November 2010 it breached Principle 5 (firms must observe proper standards of market conduct). The final notice says RBS sought to manipulate Japanese yen and Swiss franc LIBOR submissions and to influence other banks’ JPY submissions to benefit its derivatives and money‑market trading books, and that RBS did not have adequate systems and controls for its LIBOR submission process until March 2011, with initial measures remaining inadequate.

Between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2010 the FSA found that UBS breached Principles 3 and 5 of the FSA’s Principles for Businesses by misconduct in the submission and calculation of LIBOR and EURIBOR. UBS employees and managers, including four traders, colluded with interdealer brokers and some JPY LIBOR panel banks to influence JPY LIBOR submissions; this conduct undermined the integrity of those benchmark rates. The FSA imposed a financial penalty of £160,000,000 on UBS AG, effective 19 December 2012. (Principle 3 requires firms to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively; Principle 5 requires firms to observe proper standards of market conduct.)

The Financial Services Authority (the FSA) fined UBS AG £29.7m (reduced from £42.4m for early settlement) for failures in systems and controls that allowed an employee to carry out unauthorised trading which produced total losses of US$2.3bn. The unauthorised trading took place on the Exchange Traded Funds Desk in the Global Synthetic Equities trading division from UBS’s London branch between 1 June 2011 and 14 September 2011. The FSA found UBS breached Principle 3 (take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs, including adequate risk management systems) and Principle 2 (conduct business with due skill, care and diligence) and issued a Final Notice on 26 November 2012.

On 19 October 2012 the FSA issued a Final Notice fining Bank of Scotland plc £4.2m for holding inaccurate records for about 250,000 Halifax mortgage customers. The errors arose because mortgage information was held on two unsynchronised systems (with manual updates in some cases), so customers missed important updates to mortgage terms between 2004 and 2011 and some were wrongly excluded from a redress programme (a Voluntary Variation of Permission). The errors led the firm to contact 33,700 customers who should not have been included and to make £20.4m of goodwill payments to 22,700 of them; the FSA reduced an initial proposed penalty of £6m to £4.2m after applying a Stage 1 discount. The breach was of Principle 3 (firms must take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs).

On 27 June 2012 the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the FCA's predecessor, fined Barclays Bank £59.5 million — its largest ever fine — for misconduct in the way it submitted rates for LIBOR and EURIBOR, the benchmark interest rates that underpin trillions of pounds of loans and financial contracts. Between 2005 and 2009 Barclays' submissions took account of requests from its own derivatives traders who stood to profit, it tried to influence other banks' EURIBOR submissions, and during the financial crisis it lowered its LIBOR submissions because senior managers were worried about negative media comment on the bank's health. The FSA found Barclays lacked adequate controls over the process and failed to act with due skill and care when concerns were raised internally. Barclays settled early for a 30% discount (the fine would otherwise have been £85 million) and paid a further $360 million to US authorities, bringing the total to about £290 million; within days chairman Marcus Agius and chief executive Bob Diamond had resigned.

On 25 May 2011 the FSA fined Bank of Scotland plc £3.5m for breaches of Principle 3 (management and control) and Principle 6 (customers' interests) arising from failings in its complaint‑handling arrangements between 30 July 2007 and 31 October 2009. The firm agreed an early settlement and received a 30% stage‑1 discount (the headline sanction would otherwise have been £5m). The FSA found a significant number of complaints about BOS’s investment advice were wrongly decided: BOS reviewed a sample of 275 rejected complaints and overturned 45% (of those it will now uphold, 77% were by inexperienced customers and 55% were aged over 60), and the FSA’s own review reached consistent findings. During the Relevant Period BOS received 2,592 complaints; it has paid £2.4m in compensation to date, the FSA expected further compensation of around £15m, and BOS agreed to review all rejected complaints from 1 Feb 2004 to 31 Dec 2009 and to target a review of sales to 8,000 customers classed as ‘cautious’, proactively paying compensation where due and improving its sales and complaints processes.

On 20 January 2011 the Financial Services Authority (the FSA) fined City Index Limited £490,000 for failures in transaction reporting between 5 November 2007 and 21 September 2009. The firm breached SUP 17 (transaction reporting requirements) and Principles 2 and 3 (Principle 2 requires firms to conduct business with due skill, care and diligence; Principle 3 requires firms to take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs). The FSA found City Index failed to report about 55,000 transactions and submitted roughly 1,970,000 reports with one or more data fields completed incorrectly (nearly 60% of its reportable transactions), primarily because it did not identify fundamental errors after implementing a new trading platform and had inadequate reporting processes and controls; the FCA register entry records the financial penalty and does not record other consequences such as redress, a settlement discount or an appeal.

On 14 January 2011 the FSA fined Barclays Bank plc £7.7m for failings between July 2006 and November 2008 in the sale of Aviva’s Global Balanced Income Fund and Global Cautious Income Fund. The bank qualified for a 30% early‑settlement discount (Stage 1) so the penalty was reduced from £11.0m to £7.7m; the FSA found breaches of Principle 9 (firms must take reasonable care to ensure advice is suitable) and breaches of COB/COBS rules. The regulator said Barclays gave advisers inadequate training and product literature, sent sales briefs that emphasised benefits but not risks, and failed to monitor sales properly; 12,331 customers invested about £692m, 1,676 customers had complained by December 2010 and about £17m compensation had been paid with a further £20m–£42m expected (total customer redress could be up to about £60m), and Barclays agreed a third‑party past business review to identify unsuitable sales and pay redress where required.

On 11 January 2011 the FSA fined Royal Bank of Scotland Plc and National Westminster Bank Plc £2,800,000 for failings in complaint handling by their RBS UK Retail branch network between 1 December 2008 and 25 March 2010. The firms breached Principle 3 (management and control — firms must organise and control their affairs responsibly) and Principle 6 (customers' interests — firms must pay due regard to customers' interests) and qualified for a 30% early‑settlement discount (the undiscounted penalty would have been £4,000,000). The FSA found monitoring focused on process not customer outcomes, poor quality investigations and guidance for complaint handlers, weak use of Financial Ombudsman Service decisions, delays in responses and correspondence that did not fully address customers' concerns. The notice records that the firms cooperated, engaged a skilled person review, increased use of specialist handlers and reassessed complaint files; no further remedies or appeals are specified in the text provided.

The FSA published a Final Notice on 22 April 2010 fining Winterflood Securities Ltd £4,000,000 for market abuse connected to trading in Fundamental‑E Investments Plc. The regulator found Winterflood, acting as a market maker, mis‑used and delayed ‘rollovers’, creating a distortion in the market and misleading investors for about six months in 2004. The FSA said the trades had unusual features that should have alerted Winterflood to a clear and substantial risk of manipulation, but the firm continued the highly profitable trading rather than taking steps to ensure the trades were genuine. The FCA register records the action on 25 October 2010.

Between July 2009 and 16 April 2010 the UK regulator (the FSA, predecessor to the FCA) fined Goldman Sachs International £17.5m for failing to tell the FSA, until 16 April 2010, that SEC staff had served a Wells Notice on 29 September 2009 relating to an approved person’s prior US activities connected to the Abacus 2007-AC1 synthetic CDO. The FSA found breaches of Principle 11 (failing to inform the regulator), and of Principles 2 and 3 for inadequate systems and controls to pass on information about group regulatory investigations and for failing to conduct its business with due skill, care and diligence in relation to regulatory reporting. The firm settled at an early stage and qualified for a 30% settlement discount (without the discount the penalty would have been £25.0m).

On 2 August 2010 the Financial Services Authority (the FSA) fined four members of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group £5,600,000 for breaches of the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 that took place between 15 December 2007 and 31 December 2008. The breaches were failures in systems and controls to prevent breaches of UK financial sanctions: RBSG did not adequately screen incoming cross‑border payments (and certain sterling and euro payments), missed the majority of trade‑finance SWIFT messages, failed to record and continuously screen directors and beneficial owners, and did not maintain effective ‘fuzzy matching’ parameters in its screening software. RBSG agreed an early settlement so qualified for a 30% (Stage 1) discount (the penalty would otherwise have been £8,000,000); once current management identified the problems they reported them to the FSA, implemented remedial screening and governance improvements and cooperated with the investigation.

Between 1 November 2002 and 8 July 2009 J.P. Morgan Securities Limited’s Futures & Options business failed to segregate client money: instead of holding overnight balances in a segregated money‑market account the firm held them in an unsegregated account with J.P. Morgan Chase Bank. On 25 May 2010 the FSA fined JPMSL £33.32m for breach of Principle 10 (which requires firms to arrange adequate protection for client assets) and for breaches of the client money rules; the action was recorded on the FCA register on 3 June 2010. The average amount of unsegregated F&O client money over the relevant period was about US$8.55bn; JPMSL settled at an early stage and qualified for a 30% discount (the undiscounted fine would have been £47.6m, equal to 1% of that average).

Between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2007, UBS AG’s London international wealth management business failed to prevent or detect unauthorised trading by certain employees, which caused losses to customers. The FSA found breaches of Principle 2 (conduct business with due skill, care and diligence) and Principle 3 (take reasonable care to organise and control affairs responsibly and effectively) and imposed an £8,000,000 financial penalty on UBS on 5 August 2009. UBS has paid more than USD 42.4 million in compensation to affected customers.

On 5 August 2009 the FSA fined UBS AG £8,000,000 for failures in the systems and controls around its London Branch international wealth management business. Between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2007 certain employees on one desk carried out unauthorised foreign‑exchange and precious‑metals trading across 39 customer accounts and concealed those trades using internal transfers, an internal suspense account and purported loans; affected customers suffered losses and UBS has paid compensation in excess of USD 42 million. The FSA found breaches of Principle 2 (firms must act with due skill, care and diligence) and Principle 3 (firms must organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively, with adequate risk management) and noted UBS has since made changes to the systems and controls identified.

On 19 August 2009 the Financial Services Authority (FSA) fined Barclays Bank plc and Barclays Capital Securities Limited £2,450,000 (reduced from £3,500,000 for early settlement) for breaches occurring between 1 October 2006 and 31 October 2008. The FSA found Barclays failed to submit accurate transaction reports (SUP 17) in relation to an estimated 57.5 million transactions. The regulator also concluded Barclays breached Principle 2 (to conduct business with due skill, care and diligence — here, by not sufficiently reviewing its transaction‑reporting systems) and Principle 3 (to take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs, including adequate risk management systems, to meet reporting requirements).

The FSA found that Morgan Stanley & Co. International Plc breached Principles 2 and 3 of the FSA’s Principles for Businesses (Principle 2: conduct business with due skill, care and diligence; Principle 3: take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs) during the period November 2007 to May 2008. A Decision Notice dated 1 April 2009 imposed a financial penalty of £1.4 million under section 206 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000; the action is recorded on the FCA register on 13 May 2009. The register entry does not record any customer redress, settlement discount or subsequent appeal.

On 14 February 2007 the Financial Services Authority (FSA) fined Nationwide Building Society £980,000 for breaching Principle 3 (which requires firms to take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively, with adequate risk‑management systems) in the period 1 December 2004 to 1 December 2006. The FSA found Nationwide had weak information‑security risk assessment, inadequate procedures, training and controls, and a poor incident response after a laptop containing customer information was stolen, exposing customers to the risk of financial crime. Nationwide qualified for a 30% early‑settlement discount (the FSA said the undiscounted penalty would have been £1.4m) and had taken mitigating steps including disabling remote access, writing to customers, offering to reimburse customers who proved financial loss, increasing anti‑fraud monitoring and commissioning an independent review of its information security.

Between May 1999 and 6 October 2005 UBS AG failed to make required transaction reports to the Securities and Futures Authority (and later the FSA) and failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the reports it did submit. On 17 November 2005 the FSA fined UBS £100,000 for breaches of Rule 5.49 of the SFA Rules and SUP 17.4R and SUP 15.6.1R of the FSA Rules — these provisions require firms to make transaction reports and to take reasonable steps to ensure those reports are accurate. The register entry records two periods of breach: May 1999–30 November 2001 (breach of R5.49) and 1 December 2001–6 October 2005 (breach of SUP 17.4R and SUP 15.6.1R).

The FSA found that on 2 August 2004 Citigroup Global Markets Limited (CGML) ran a large, technology‑enabled trading strategy in European government bonds—building very substantial long positions and then exiting them quickly via many simultaneous trades on the MTS platform—which caused short‑term disruption to MTS volumes and sharp price falls. The FSA concluded CGML breached Principle 2 (to conduct business with due skill, care and diligence) and Principle 3 (to organise and control its affairs and have adequate risk management) because the trade was not escalated to senior management, control functions were not consulted, clear size parameters were not set or reviewed, and trader supervision was inadequate. The FSA imposed a penalty made up of a relinquishment of profits of £9,960,860 and an additional penalty of £4,000,000; the decision was recorded on 28 June 2005.

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) fined City Index Ltd £35,000 (recorded 23 March 2005) for producing misleading financial promotions for spread betting and CFDs that were communicated between September and November 2003. The promotions, run in national newspapers, magazines and on carrier bags, failed to give a clear, simple and prominent warning that a customer’s liability may exceed their initial deposit; a carrier‑bag promotion offering a “free £25 bet” required an initial spread bet (so was not free). The FSA also found that City Index had ineffective systems and controls for approving financial promotions; the register entry records only the financial penalty and does not record any redress, settlement discount or appeal.

The FSA fined The Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland £1,250,000 on 12 January 2004 for widespread failures in keeping customer identification records. A 2002 internal review found a 55% failure rate across the Retail, Corporate and Business divisions; the FSA’s investigation concluded the bank breached ML 7.3.2 (firms must retain a copy of customer identification evidence or a record of where it can be obtained) and ML 2.1.1 (firms must set up and operate arrangements to ensure they comply with the Money Laundering rules). The FSA noted the failings dated back at least to 2000, accepted that the bank promptly implemented remedial plans and co‑operated with the investigation, and said those factors reduced the size of the penalty.

On 9 December 2003 the FSA fined Abbey National Asset Managers Limited (ANAM) £320,000 for failures in senior management arrangements, systems and controls between December 2001 and June 2003. The regulator found ANAM did not have appropriate systems and controls, was slow to address divisional compliance concerns arising from its Risk Mitigation Programme and from two dealing desks, and had insufficient compliance resource and management information. The breaches were of FSA Principle 2 (which requires firms to act with due skill, care and diligence) and SYSC rules on senior management arrangements; ANAM paid about £300,000 in compensation to clients, implemented detailed systems and controls in June 2003, and the FSA said ANAM’s early agreement of facts and settlement were taken into account when deciding the penalty.

In September 2003 the FSA fined Lloyds TSB Bank plc (LTSB) £1.9m for serious failings in how it sold the Extra Income and Growth Plan (EIGP). Around 51,000 EIGP policies were sold in four tranches between October 2000 and July 2001; the FSA found that LTSB’s branch network sold about 22,500 policies (44% of sales) that were unsuitable because customers ended up too concentrated in the product. LTSB agreed not to refer the matter to the tribunal, has paid about £98m in compensation to roughly 22,500 customers, and the FSA said the penalty was reduced because LTSB cooperated, carried out remedial work and settled early.

The Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland was fined £750,000 by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) in a Final Notice dated 5 February 2003 for failures in its PEP and ISA Department. Between November 1999 and August 2001 the firm’s implementation of its LISA PEP and ISA computer system, and the transfer of PEP customers’ accounts into that system (together with management failings), meant it could not reconcile the cash it held for PEP and ISA customers or state accurately how much customer money it held.

On 12 December 2002 the FSA fined the Royal Bank of Scotland plc £750,000 for widespread failures in anti‑money‑laundering checks when opening retail accounts. An FSA investigation of 181 accounts opened between January and May 2002 found 89 files lacked sufficient evidence that the customer was who they claimed to be (breaching Rule 3.1.3, which requires firms to obtain sufficient evidence of identity) and seven files where RBS could not supply copies or details of the identity documents used (breaching Rule 7.3.2, which requires firms to retain such records) — two files breached both rules, giving 94 problem files in total. The FSA noted RBS had detected KYC weaknesses itself in December 2001, implemented a remedial plan that reduced failures from April 2002, and co‑operated fully with the investigation; the regulator said those factors materially reduced the size of the penalty.