Welcome to our Financial Services 360. This provides concise updates on some of the key UK legal and regulatory matters from each quarter relevant to UK financial services firms, including UK asset managers, private banks and others.
In this edition for Q1 2024, we cover a variety of topics split into five sections:
At the end of July, the scope of the Consumer Duty will be extended to apply to closed products and services, and by then firms must have produced their first Board reports assessing implementation. Over the last few months, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has been busy publishing a number of reports and speeches, which we covered in our recent briefing.
In March 2024 the FCA published its 2024-25 Business Plan, which we cover in more detail below, in which it set out some of its ongoing and planned work on the Consumer Duty. In the coming year the FCA intends to review unit-linked pensions and long-term savings products to test the transparency of charges across value chains, how firms assess overall product value and their response where they identify unfair value.
The FCA will also be undertaking multi-firm work, looking at how swiftly the insurance industry responds to claims, including where customers are more likely to show characteristics of vulnerability.
The FCA published its finalised guidance on financial promotions on social media. This applies to all firms using social media as part of their marketing strategy, and not just “finfluencers”. Firms are reminded that:
The Government has legislated to reinstate the previous eligibility criteria to qualify as a high net worth or sophisticated investor under the Financial Promotions Order, which had been increased as of 31 January 2024. The Government will carry out further work to review the scope of the exemptions.
The FCA published a statement in response, rather obliquely pointing out that they disagreed with the Government on this (it has a link to their April 2023 letter to the Treasury Select Committee stating their concerns about the exemption).
It is our understanding that this policy reversal was in response to a letter to the Chancellor from the Start-up Coalition, a group of executives, tech groups and start-up investors. The group had been campaigning against the decision to increase the thresholds for those exempted from restrictions on financial promotions, saying it would block vital investment and disproportionately affect women and ethnic minority groups.
In March the Treasury published an update on the Smarter Regulatory Framework (SRF), setting out progress so far, work underway and the Government’s approach on the next phase. It has identified 777 pieces of assimilated law relating to financial services within scope of the SRF, and as of February 2024 had removed 44 per cent of these, including repealing those which were identified as being redundant after Brexit.
The Government is currently in the process of replacing regulations including Solvency II and parts of the Payment Services Regulations 2017, relating to contract termination.
The next stage (Tranche 3) will include assimilated law which has been identified as having the biggest potential benefits to UK economic growth, such as MiFID, the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive and the UCITS Directive, and for which the Government intends to undertake a policy review to decide which parts should be retained. The Government intends to adopt a multi-staged approach, in order to minimise the burden on industry, and will update the Regulatory Initiatives Grid with its plans.
Debanking continues to be in the news. On 21 February the APPG for Fair Business Banking published a report on debanking. Among other things, the report sets out concerns that some businesses are refused banking facilities purely due to running a certain type of business which is considered high risk, for example oncourse bookmakers or yachtbrokers. They also gave the example of the industry body for cryptocurrency, CryptoUK, which was refused a bank account even though they do not accept fees in crypto. The refusal was allegedly based on their name.
The APPG accepts that running accounts for these types of businesses does create more costs for banks, for example because of more AML checks or because they rely more on cash. According to the report, retail banks spend around two thirds of their total annual spend on compliance on customer due diligence.
The report concludes that:
On 21 April the Treasury Committee published a press release relating to correspondence it has had with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) regarding the jump in complaints relating to debanking. It announced that there had been a spike in debanking complaints of 44 per cent overall, and 81 per cent relating to business bank accounts.
Nikhil Rathi, Chief Executive of the FCA, has given a number of speeches over the last few months, which always provide a useful insight into the current priorities of the FCA. These include:
In January the Treasury published a consultation on Enhancing the Special Resolution Regime. These proposals relate to shoring up the regime for smaller banks, following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank last year.
The Government is proposing the introduction of a new power for the Bank of England to use (as resolution authority) in the resolution of failed smaller banks, to be used alongside existing powers. Under the new power the Bank of England would be able to use funds from the FSCS to cover the costs associated with a resolution, including those relating to recapitalising and operating the failed bank.
It is hoped that this would prevent a run on withdrawals as there would be no delay in obtaining protected funds. Larger banks already have to hold a certain amount of equity that can be used to recapitalise them in the event of failure.
On 15 January the FCA published a Dear Board letter setting out its expectations for Loan-based Peer-to-Peer Lending platforms, and also published a Dear Board letter setting out its expectations for Investment-based crowdfunding platforms
The letters set out key areas of concern for the FCA including:
Both the FCA and the PRA are continuing to take a keen interest in the impact AI and Big Tech will have on financial services in the future. Nikhil Rathi is currently Chair of the Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum (DRCF), which brings together regulators with an interest in AI including the Competition and Markets Authority and Ofcom.
On 22 April Nikhil Rathi gave a speech to the DRCF entitled “Navigating the UK’s Digital Regulation Landscape: Where are we headed?” Points of note include:
In April the FCA also published its response (Feedback Statement FS24/1) to its Call for Input on the competition implications of Big Tech and data asymmetry.
The FCA also published a document setting out its approach to AI, further to the Government’s request to regulators to set out what work they were doing on AI and how they were using it.
The PRA and Bank of England also sent a joint response to the Government, setting out the work they were doing on ensuring that Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) are used safely within their regulatory remit. Their work had already shown that AI/ML is already being widely adopted in many parts of the financial sector to improve firms’ operational efficiency, better detect fraud and money laundering, and enhance data and analytics capabilities.
On 3 April the Bank of England and FCA published a joint consultation paper on their proposals for a Digital Securities Sandbox. This is aimed at supporting innovation, providing a glidepath and protecting financial stability and market integrity as the use of limits (set by the Bank) will facilitate the safe-scaling of business. It will allow firms to use developing technology such as DLT in the issuance, trading and settlement of securities such as shares and bonds. However, the trading and settlement of derivative contracts and of “unbacked cryptocurrencies” such as Bitcoin are not in the scope of the DSS.
The intention is that financial market participants, such as companies that use capital markets to raise finance, or participants in financial markets who trade securities, should be able to interact with the firms inside the DSS as normal while benefitting from the new technology. Firms should be able to use the securities issued in the DSS as they normally would any other security, including in securities financing transactions, or as collateral. They can also write derivative contracts based on those securities, subject to the usual requirements.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), Payment Systems Regulator (PSR), and Prudential Regulatory Authority (PRA) have all published their business plans for 2024-25 during March and April. Summary details below.
The Financial Conduct Authority 2024/25 Business Plan
On 19 March the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published its annual Business Plan, which details its work over the next 12 months, its priorities for 2024/2025, as well as progress on its three-year strategy. Its three-year strategy set out how it would deliver its objectives, focusing on reducing and preventing serious harm, setting and testing higher standards, and promoting competition and positive change.
The FCA aims to continue to deliver on its thirteen public commitments, including the following planned work:
The Prudential Regulation Authority
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published their 2024-25 Business Plan. Some highlights include:
The Payment Systems Regulator
The Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) also published its annual plan, setting out its workplan and how it intends to deliver against its four commitments: protection, competition, unlocking account-to-account payments, and access and choice.
In the context of the economic environment, and ahead of significant regulatory change to be delivered in 2024, the FCA has published an interim update portfolio letter setting out its supervisory strategy for the asset management and alternatives portfolio, setting out updates and intentions for the year ahead, including the following:
Further to the Investment Research Review published last year, the FCA has published a consultation paper CP 24/7 on its proposal to allow additional optionality for paying for investment research, by allowing firms to use bundled payments for third party research and execution services. This new option would apply in addition to the current options of paying for research from the firm’s own resources or using a research payment account.
The consultation closes on 5 June.
On 25 March the FCA published a new webpage on information for AIFMS using the host model to manage alternative investment funds (AIFs) known as AIFM hosting. It sets out the findings from its 2023 review including potential harm caused by this model relating to a lack of oversight of secondees and potential conflicts of interest, insufficient involvement in investor due diligence (including financial crime responsibilities), and inadequacies in capital adequacy calculations. The FCA also found misleading claims from third parties that had seconded staff to AIFMs, for example, appointed representatives holding themselves out as investment managers, wealth managers and stockbrokers, even though seconded staff were only permitted to carry out those activities for the AIFM. The FCA warns that it has already taken action against firms where it found harm arising, and is continuing to monitor this area closely.
Alongside its 2024 Budget Statement, the Treasury published a policy document along with a summary of responses to its 2023 consultation, on the scope and design of a tax regime for a new UK investment fund vehicle, being an unauthorised contractual scheme called the Reserved Investor Fund (RIF). The Treasury intends to publish detailed rules in a SI at a later date.
On 1 May the Treasury and the FCA published a joint roadmap to implementing the Overseas Funds Regime. You can read our briefing on the new roadmap . The joint roadmap includes a proposed timeline for the OFR but does note that the timelines are “subject to change and that any updates will be published on the Government and FCA websites. The current timeline is that:
Firms already in the TMPR will be offered (usually on an alphabetical basis) three-month landing slots in which to apply for recognition under the OFR, starting from October, over the following two years. In respect of funds that miss their landing slots or in respect of which the manager has failed to apply within the three-month window, will be removed from the TMPR, will cease to be a recognised scheme, and cannot be promoted to retail investors until a successful application under the OFR is made.
Firms must apply under the OFR using the FCA’s online system Connect and firms will need to register as a user, which is a straightforward process. The application must be submitted using Connect, and we await details of the Form the FCA is expecting firms to use. The application fee must also be paid. The FCA will then have two months from receipt of a complete application to make its decision to recognise the scheme (or notify the applicant of a refusal).
The FCA published a webpage on common errors made by asset managers when applying for authorisation. The FCA also include some statistics on authorisation: in the last financial year, 73 per cent were approved in under eight months and 56 per cent were determined in less than six months (total of 310 applications).
18 per cent of applications were withdrawn or rejected due to various concerns, including:
On 26 March 2024, the Directive amending AIFMD and the UCITS Directive was published in the Official Journal. Directive (EU) 2024/927 came into force on 15 April 2024, and must be implemented by Member States by 16 April 2026 (apart from certain measures which must be implemented the following year).
The Directive amends parts of Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD), and modernises the framework governing Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities (UCITS) level including making amendments to delegation arrangements, liquidity risk management, supervisory reporting, provision of depositary and custody services, and loan origination by AIFs.
On 11 January the PRA published a Dear CEO letter to UK Deposit Takers, setting out the PRA’s supervisory priorities for 2024. the theme underpinning the priorities is the need for robust governance, risk management and controls at firms to enable the effective and proactive identification, assessment and mitigation of risks in an increasingly challenging and changeable operating environment.
The PRA priorities are credit risk, financial resilience, operational resilience, model risk, data risk and financial risks arising from climate change. The letter also mentions Resolution and Recovery.
The PRA warns firms that they should expect ongoing engagement with the PRA on credit and counterparty credit risk, including targeted requests for enhanced data and analysis.
The PRA also reminded firms to be mindful of the upcoming implementation of the Basel 3.1 standards, and to ensure that they plan accordingly to maintain financial resilience.
On 20 March the FCA published a Dear CEO letter to consumer lending firms, setting out its supervisory strategy. Three portfolios; High-Cost Lending, Mainstream Consumer Credit Lending and Credit Unions, are covered in the one letter. Points of interest include:
In a recent High Court case Kumar and others v LSC Finance Ltd, the court examined the regulatory perimeter for regulated mortgages.
The appellants were the directors of Aureation Developments Ltd (ADL) and Aureation Construction Ltd (ACL). Each of the appellants personally, along with ACL and ADL, entered into a series of loan agreements with LSC Finance Ltd (LSC) to facilitate the purchase and developments of various plots of land. LSC was not authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) to issue regulated loans or mortgages.
The loans eventually defaulted, and the appellants argued that the loans were unenforceable because they constituted regulated mortgage contracts under FSMA which LSC was not authorised to make and were, therefore, unenforceable. The High Court held, however, that the Loans were investment property loans within the meaning of Article 61A(6) of the Regulated Activities Order, and were therefore, enforceable. The evidence presented indicated that the Appellants had intended to sell the Properties to third parties and to utilise the proceeds to repay the Loans. This proved detrimental to the Appellants’ case. Ultimately, both requirements for an investment property loan were satisfied and the appeal was consequently dismissed.
This case highlights that the court will focus on ascertaining the true purpose of the loan irrespective of the lender’s state of knowledge about it. This case serves as an important reminder to lenders to conduct sufficient enquiries into the borrower’s intended use before determining the regulatory status of, and entering into, a loan agreement.
In April the FCA published a Policy Statement PS24/2 on strengthening protections for borrowers in financial difficulty, consumer credit and mortgages. The FCA has incorporated relevant aspects of their tailored support guidance (TSG) into the FCA Handbook, together with further targeted changes to provide a stronger framework for firms to protect customers facing payment difficulties The FCA has also updated their non-Handbook guidance (FG 23/2) to reflect these changes. The rules come into force on 4 November 2024, from which date the TSG will be withdrawn.
On 27 February the FCA announced changes to the way it will carry out its enforcement function. The FCA intends to improve the pace and transparency of cases and pursue a more streamlined portfolio of cases aligned to its strategic priorities where it can deliver the greatest impact. The FCA also plans to close more quickly those cases where no outcome is achievable.
As part of the new approach, the FCA is consulting on increasing the transparency of its investigations, by (among other things) announcing the target of investigations at an early stage, and providing updates during the course of the investigation. This will be subject to a public interest test. Currently investigations are only announced in very limited circumstances.
The proposal regarding publicising the start of investigations has proved extremely controversial, receiving widespread criticism from a range of stakeholders the Chancellor and industry associations. The FCA recently told the Treasury Committee that it expects to take “several months” to consider the feedback and decide next steps. We would hope that, given the extent of negative feedback, the FCA will make changes to its proposal and consult again.
In March the FCA wrote a Dear CEO letter to Annex 1 firms (businesses such as some lenders, brokers and other firms that carry out specified activities meaning they must be registered and supervised by the FCA for compliance with the Money Laundering Regulations) over AML failings. The FCA found common failings including:
On 25 April the FCA published a consultation on amending the Financial Crime guide with the following proposed changes:
PRA fines HSBC £57m
In January, the PRA fined HSBC Bank plc (HBEU) and HSBC UK Bank plc (HBUK) (together, the firms) £57m for historic breaches of the Depositor Protection Rules, including the failure to identify deposits which were eligible for the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. As well as the Depositor Protection Rules, the firms were found to have breached several rules, including PRA Fundamental Rule 2 that a firm must conduct its business with due skill, care and diligence.
The PRA found that HBEU had incorrectly marked 99 per cent of eligible deposits by value as ineligible for FSCS protection. Despite an internal working group established to investigate the matter in 2019, HSBC failed to notify the PRA when it became aware of the potential scale of the issue.
As part of its finding that the firms had breached Fundamental Rule 6, that a firm must organise and control its affairs responsibly and effectively, the PRA criticised the firms for failing to ensure that a senior manager, under the SMCR, had been allocated ownership of the relevant processes.
Due to HSBC’s cooperation with the regulators, its fine was reduced by 30 per cent from £82m to £57m.
FCA fines former LCF director for issuing misleading promotional materials to the public
Floris Jakobus Huisamen, a former director of the now-insolvent investment firm London Capital & Finance (LCF) has been fined £31,800 and prohibited from performing any regulated function after the FCA found that he had signed off misleading promotional materials to be marketed to the public.
Examples include false statements about investments having no hidden fees, claims that LCF’s lending was secured against realisable assets, false marketing of minibonds as tax-free ISAs, and references to LCF being authorised by the FCA. Despite knowledge that all these statements were untrue, Mr Huisman repeatedly approved LCF’s promotional messaging.
LCF is the subject of various ongoing regulatory investigations and litigation, including an SFO criminal investigation. On 7 May the Financial Reporting Council announced that it had fined three audit firms for breaches of audit rules, including a failure to obtain an adequate understanding of the nature of LCF’s business and its internal controls.
WealthTek LLP investigation
In March the FCA announced that the High Court has permitted it to pause its civil proceedings against WealthTek LLP for 12 months whilst it prioritises a parallel criminal investigation into WealthTek and its CEO, Jonathan Dance.
In April last year, WealthTek was shut down by the FCA after it was discovered that there were potential serious regulatory and operational breaches. Mr Dance’s assets were subjected to a £40m worldwide freezing order. It was later revealed that there was a shortfall of £71.7m in custody assets and £9.7m in client funds, after which the FCA initiated civil proceedings against Mr Dance.
In November, the freezing order was upgraded to a restraint order under the Proceeds of Crime Act, and the FCA initiated a criminal investigation against Mr Dance into the potential offences of fraud and money laundering. Specific alleged offences include misrepresentation to clients and prospective clients regarding the holding of their assets and money, forging a letter from the FCA setting out his permissions, and transferring significant amounts of client money to his personal bank accounts.
The FCA considers that this is one of the largest frauds carried out by a regulated individual in an authorised firm.
FCA secures £1.6m for investors from alleged unlawful investment schemes
In April the FCA announced that it had secured court approval to obtain £1.6m from Argento Wealth Ltd (AWL) and its sole director Mr Daniel Willis, who promoted two alleged unlawful investment schemes.
The FCA alleged that AWL unlawfully:
The settlement agreed by the FCA was intended to prevent all of AWL/Mr Willis’ remaining assets from being used up to meet the ongoing legal and living costs. Without the settlement, there would have been a significant risk of the remaining investor money being used to fund legal fees, leaving nothing for investors.
The FCA published its finalised anti-greenwashing guidance, in advance of the anti-greenwashing rule (AGR) coming into force at the end of May.
In April the FCA published a consultation on extending the Sustainability Disclosure Requirements (SDR) regime to portfolio management.
You can read more on both these developments in our briefing. You may also be interested in our Dispute Resolution Trends & Insights report to learn about why we anticipate more ESG actions.
Picture top left to bottom right:
Grania Baird, Partner
Andy Peterkin, Partner
Jessica Reed, Partner
Katy Ruddell, Senior Counsel
Nandini Sur, Senior Associate
Edward Twigger, Senior Associate
Kya Fear, Senior Associate
Beth Walsh, Senior Associate
Leon Chng, Associate
Suzanne Conticelli, Knowledge Lawyer
Nina Caplin, Knowledge Lawyer
Miranda Good, Trainee Solicitor
With many thanks to Eleanor Fielding, an Associate our Financial Services team for contributing to this briefing.
If you require further information about anything covered in this briefing, please contact Grania Baird, Edward Twigger or your usual contact at the firm on +44 (0)20 3375 7000.
This publication is a general summary of the law. It should not replace legal advice tailored to your specific circumstances.
© Farrer & Co LLP, May 2024
A group of Palestinian-British individuals took initial steps to bring British Petroleum (BP) to court on Tuesday, accusing the company of aiding and abetting w
The British car industry has welcomed government proposals that could allow Toyota Prius-style hybrids to continue to be sold in the UK after 2030, as part of a
The UK housebuilder Vistry has issued its third profit warning in three months, in a year-end blow to the construction company that sent its shares to a two-yea
Welshpool & Llanfair Light Railway Over £2 million will be awarded to 7 much-loved local places in Wales, so they can stay open to keep their communities t