The FCA has published Policy Statement (PS25/5) outlining its updated Enforcement Guide and the regulator’s approach to investigation publicity. The Enforcement Guide will be referred to as ENFG in the FCA Handbook, to set it apart from its predecessor.

The changes are designed to make the FCA’s enforcement work faster, clearer and more transparent, both for the industry and the public.

The ENFG follows Consultation Paper (CP24/2) which set out plans to empower the FCA to publicise details of enforcement cases at a very early stage. The subsequent reaction and scrutiny from stakeholders and government to CP24/2 resulted in a retreat by the FCA, as it decided to abandon the infamous “name-and-shame” proposals, a development that was welcomed by the broader industry. Also see further coverage on GRIP: Streamlined UK Enforcement Guide now in force.

Key changes

While much of the focus on CP24/2 centred on the FCA’s publicity proposals, the FCA also introduced a number of broader updates to the ENFG. These include:

Approach to publicising investigations

While the existing “exceptional circumstances” test for publicising investigations into regulated firms remains, the FCA has introduced three additional circumstances where announcements may be made. In limited circumstances, the FCA can:

• announce and name subjects of investigations into suspected unauthorized financial services or criminal offences related to unregulated activity. This move is aimed at alerting consumers and investors to potential risks and helping the investigation by bringing forward witnesses;
• reactively confirm it is investigating a subject if the fact has already been made public by the subject, an affiliated company, or a regulatory body. This change is intended to clarify any misunderstandings and provide transparency once the investigation is already in the public domain;
• make public that it is investigating a particular matter without naming the subject, for educational purposes or to encourage compliance. These anonymized announcements are expected to serve as valuable educational tools, helping firms identify areas of concern and drive behavioral changes to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements. It is anticipated that these anonymous announcements will provide firms with a better understanding of the regulatory landscape, with the knock-on effect being increased compliance by firms.

This approach is positive and balances the need to safeguard the integrity of the investigative process while providing for accountability and transparency, when appropriate.

A more user-friendly document

The ENFG has been trimmed and refocused, with the FCA shrinking the page count by more than 250 pages. Duplicative content, such as that also stated in the Decision Procedure and Penalties manual (DEPP),  has been removed, with some material moved to the FCA’s website for easier access. Further, supervision content has been reduced to ensure the ENFG remains focused on enforcement.

The result is a more concise, user-friendly guide that focuses on how the FCA investigates and takes enforcement action, while also explaining the key principles guiding its approach.

Although these changes were generally non-contentious, respondents did raise concerns as to whether the FCA would consult on future changes to the ENFG. The FCA reassured that, even though it is not obliged to do so, it will continue to consult as it always has. Some respondents also expressed unease about the shift of certain content to the FCA’s website, arguing that having all enforcement-related information in one place would be more useful. Despite this, the FCA has decided to proceed, noting that website content can be updated without prior consultation.

Further changes

The FCA has also introduced several targeted amendments, which largely reflect the FCA’s current practice, including:

• a clarified approach to receiving a firm’s legally privileged reports under a limited waiver, which it will accept but will not:
  1. confirm the existence or scope of legal privilege;
  2. agree to any conditions or stipulations that aim to limit its use of the information in carrying out its statutory duties (for example, a condition that the report be used solely for supervision purposes and not for enforcement);
• discretion to exclude legal advisers from compelled interviews, should the FCA deem their presence may:
  1. prejudice an investigation, for example by making the interviewee less able to be candid in their answers;
  2. create potential conflicts of interest;
• providing authority to Directors in Enforcement to initiate civil proceedings. This additional flexibility was previously reserved for Executive Directors, however the FCA wished to expand the authority at an appropriate level of seniority. However, criminal prosecutions remain the responsibility of Executive Directors;
• softening the starting presumption that a scoping meeting will be held. Instead, this decision will be made on a case-by-case basis at the start of an investigation. The FCA acknowledged the benefits of these meetings, and noted that it will generally hold one if requested;
• removing Private Warnings as an enforcement tool. Some respondents supported the removal, preferring the use of more transparent tools available in the FCA’s toolbox. However, over half of the respondents opposed the proposal. The overriding concern was that the FCA would stop providing private feedback and instead publish findings for the wider industry to consider. The FCA reassured respondents that Private Warnings have not been used for some time, and that this change will not affect the types of cases it refers to Enforcement for investigation, nor will it result in slower investigation times. As a result, references to Private Warnings have been deleted.

Unfortunately, the FCA did not include a marked-up version of the ENFG. However Annex 3 to PS25/5 provides a helpful table outlining what content has been removed or relocated.

Commentary

The outcome on publicising investigations is welcome, but it came at a cost. The amount of time and energy spent across the industry responding to the original “name-and-shame” proposals was considerable. For a regulator committed to regulating for growth, the lesson is clear: engage early, listen carefully, and build policy on firm foundations.

The revisions to the ENFG serve as further evidence of the FCA’s commitment to delivering on its strategic objective of supporting and driving economic growth, as articulated in its 2025-30 Strategy.

The ENFG, including the policy on investigation publicity, came into force on June 3, 2025. The changes apply only to investigations launched on or after this date.