FCA drops plans to routinely ‘name and shame’ firms under investigation

The UK’s financial watchdog has confirmed controversial plans have been ditched to routinely “name and shame” firms facing investigations in the wake of mounting pressure over the proposals.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) said it would drop proposals to apply a new public interest test for announcing investigations into regulated firms “given the lack of consensus” over the plans.

The regulator will instead keep its current policy to apply an “exceptional circumstances” test.

It marks a major U-turn for the FCA and follows a widespread backlash after the FCA announced early last year that it planned to announce when it has opened enforcement investigations into financial firms, which it currently does only in very limited cases.

Nikhil Rathi, chief executive of the FCA, said: “Considerable concerns remain about our proposal to change the way we publicise investigations into regulated firms, so we will stick to publicising in exceptional circumstances as we do today.

“We will implement changes which have commanded wider support and which we believe will help support our efforts to protect consumers from harm.”

In a letter to the Treasury Select Committee, the FCA outlined aims to speed up the pace of its investigations and set out the next steps in its approach to improving transparency.

It said: “Following extensive engagement, there is support for reactively confirming investigations already in the public domain; public notifications which focus on the potentially unlawful activities of unregulated firms and regulated firms operating outside the regulatory perimeter; and publishing greater detail of issues under investigation on an anonymous basis.”

The FCA plans to move forward with these plans with aims to publish a final policy by the end of June.

The FCA’s original plans would have seen it “name and shame” companies being investigated, regardless of whether it decides there had been misconduct or a breach of rules.

In November, the FCA agreed to water down the proposals, saying it would give firms 10 days’ notice before any announcement is made, rather than the one day previously suggested.

But the plans still met with fierce opposition, with an influential House of Lords committee recently calling for them to be scrapped.

The Lords committee warned in February that announcing enforcement investigations early without addressing concerns over the plans could damage the reputation of companies who may never face regulatory action.

The chairman of the committee also branded the FCA’s consultation process an “abject failure”.

The FCA also announced on Wednesday that, following consultations conducted by itself and the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), it will not carry on with rules and targets for diversity and inclusion within regulated firms “to avoid additional burdens on firms at this time”.

It said it would continue to prioritise work on non-financial misconduct, but stressed it would ensure the approach is “proportionate and aligned with planned legislation” and will set out the next steps on this by the end of June.

Jill Lorimer, partner in the financial services regulatory team at Kingsley Napley, said: “Today’s announcement is a clear indication that the regulator accepts that its ‘name and shame’ proposal was deeply flawed from the outset.”

Chris Cummings, chief executive of the Investment Association, said the group was “extremely pleased” with the FCA’s decision to climb down on the planned changes.

He said: “It is vital that the UK remains globally competitive and attractive for investors and today’s decision from the FCA demonstrates its willingness to deliver on its secondary objective to secure UK competitiveness.”

Miles Celic, chief executive of TheCityUK, said: “The FCA’s decision gives firms and investors greater certainty and predictability, which is good for the UK’s international competitiveness and wider economic growth.”