FSA, FCA and PRA enforcement for unfair treatment of customers

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.

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 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 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.

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.

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 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 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 (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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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 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 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 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 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 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.

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.

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.