FCA fines for market abuse, benchmark and trading misconduct

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 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 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 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).

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 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.

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.

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 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 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.

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.

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 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 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).

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.

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.

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.

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.