UK Regulatory Warns Again On Cryptoasset Promotions

The FCA has explained again that there are currently only three ways to communicate cryptoasset promotions to UK consumers, with a fourth channel pending:

1. via an FCA/FSMA authorised firm [which does not include an e-money or payment institution for these purposes]. 
2. via an unauthorised firm but approved by an FCA authorised firm [the govt is proposing a regulatory 'gateway' for authorised firms that wish to approve financial promotions for unauthorised firms]. 
3. a cryptoasset business registered under money laundering regulation with the FCA (cryptoasset exchange and custodian wallet providers), communicating its own promotions [under a pending exemption].
4. the promotion otherwise complies with the terms of an exemption in the Financial Promotion Order.

Even with the new route, promotions not made using one of these channels will constitute a criminal offence punishable by up to 2 years imprisonment.

This post is for information purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Please let me know if you need legal assistance in this area.

The New "Consumer Duty" For UK Financial Services Firms

The FCA has proposed a new "consumer duty" that will apply to most firms it supervises where products and services are offered to ‘retail customers’. In effect, the FCA says the duty will amount to a higher statutory standard of care for consumers than results from the FCA's current set of Principles for Business and conduct rules. It is intended to stop short of being an actual statutory or general law "duty of care", even though the standard is said to reflect the common law concept of how 'a reasonable prudent firm would act'; and it will not create a fiduciary duty or advisory obligation where one does not already exist. I guess 'cakeism' is not confined to Downing Street! Final rules are due by 1 August 2022 and firms should have until 30 April 2023 to fully implement the changes needed to comply (but will need to be able to demonstrate their progress toward implementation when asked). The scale of change should be 'seismic' - like simultaneously preparing for 'Treating Customers Fairly' and the Senior Managers and Certification Regime while trying to run a business (or changing all four wheels on a race car, mid-corner). But whether it will actually deliver better outcomes for consumers remains to be seen... Please let me know if you would like any help.

Scope of the Consumer Duty

As explained further below, the consumer duty will be delivered in a framework of three elements: a new 'consumer principle'; some 'cross-cutting rules'; and 'four outcomes'. 

A concept of "reasonableness" will apply to all three elements. This is intended to create an 'objective standard of conduct' that could reasonably be expected of a prudent firm which carries on the same activity in relation to the same product or service; and with the necessary understanding of the needs and characteristics of its customers (based on the needs and characteristics of an average customer). Factors that can influence what is reasonable include:

• the nature of the product or service being offered or provided;
• the nature of the firm’s role and relationship with customers; 
• the potential of the product or service to harm consumers (higher risk means additional care); 
• the complexity of the product or service (again, more complex products and services involve extra care); 
• the role of the firm in the distribution chain; 
• the reasonable expectations of consumers, based on the nature and quality of the product or service as presented and previous interaction with consumers;
• the specific characteristics of consumers, recognising and responding to their diverse needs, including vulnerability or protected characteristics.
  

The scope of the 'duty' will be the same as the current 'conduct of business' rule books or other applicable regulation (e.g. for payment services); and exemptions from financial promotions rules, for example. Firms in a chain will need to agree where their responsibilities meet.

The Consumer Duty applies to products and services offered to ‘retail customers’, as defined within the scope of the FCA Handbook in each sector. For example: 

• consumer credit: the Consumer Duty applies to all regulated credit-related activities;
  
• deposit-taking: the duty applies to consumers, micro-enterprises and charities with a turnover of less than £1m (in line with the banking customer test);
  
• insurance: the duty follows the position in the Insurance Conduct of Business Sourcebook (ICOBS), so does not apply to reinsurance or contracts of large risk sold to commercial customers;
  
• investments: the duty applies to business conducted with retail clients as defined in the Conduct of Business Sourcebook (COBS);
  
• mortgages: the duty follows the position in the Mortgage Conduct Business Sourcebook (MCOB), so applies to all regulated mortgage contracts, but not, for example, unregulated buy-to-let contracts or commercial lending. Where the owner of a mortgage book is unregulated but a regulated firm is the loan servicer, the Consumer Duty would apply 'in an appropriate and proportionate manner to their function';
  
• payment services: the duty applies to business conducted with consumers, micro-enterprises and charities in line with the Payment Services Regulations 2017 (so will not apply to the extent that certain rules can be contracted out of for larger corporate/charity customers, for example).

There are some exclusions, but the duty can apply to prospective customers as well as unregulated activity that is ancillary to regulated activity. 

Firms will need to take additional care to ensure vulnerable consumers achieve outcomes that are as good as those of other consumers. 

Framework of the Consumer Duty

A new consumer principle: The FCA will add a 12th Principle for Business ("A firm must act to deliver good outcomes for retail clients"). This is considered to be a higher standard than "A firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly" ('treating customers fairly" or 'TCF'). While this overarching standard of conduct is 'clarified and amplified' through 'cross-cutting rules' and four (non-exhaustive/exclusive) 'four outcomes' it must be judged on its own, in terms of what is reasonably expected given the nature of the firm's role and the product or service it offers. 

Cross-cutting rules: Firms must: 

• Act in good faith (characterised by honesty, fair and open dealing and consistency with the reasonable expectations of consumers);
  

• Avoid causing foreseeable harm to customers (including taking proactive steps to avoid it where that is within the firm’s control);
  

• Enable and support customers to pursue their financial objectives (establishing an environment in which consumers can act in their own interests; understanding consumers’ behavioural biases and the impact that their vulnerability can have on their needs; using their knowledge of how consumers behave to enable and support them to make good decisions). 

The “four outcomes”: 

• the quality of firms’ products and services: these must be 'fit for purpose'; designed to meet consumers’ needs; and targeted at the consumers whose needs they are designed to meet, with different requirements for firms depending on their role in the distribution chain as 'manufacturers' and/or 'distributors';
  

• the price and value of products and services: the FCA wants both manufacturers and distributors to ensure the pricing represents fair value to consumers and to regularly assess that outcome;

• consumer understanding: firms’ communications must consistently support consumers by enabling them to make informed decisions about their products and services, giving consumers the information they need, at the right time, and presented in a way they can understand. Communications must be clear, fair and not misleading, as well as tailored in various ways, accurate, relevant and timely; and
  

• support for consumers: must meets consumers’ needs throughout their relationship with the firm, to enable them to realise the benefits of the products and services they buy and ensure they are not hindered from acting in their own interests. 

Impact of the Consumer Duty

The impact of the Consumer Duty will be enormous on an industry that tends to see compliance as a bolt-on to commercial operations and a cost-centre rather than an inherent part of product development lifecycle, even if policies, processes and procedures incorporate the concept of 'Treating Customers Fairly' and require legal/compliance checks and approvals.

The FCA expects firms to consider and determine what behaviours, policies, procedures, monitoring and feedback/reporting is necessary for them to satisfy the Consumer Duty - and be able to demonstrate how they have implemented the duty. 

Firms will need to be proactive and show that their focus is on consumer impact/outcomes rather than the firm's own compliance processes; and acting reasonably, rather than merely 'taking all reasonable steps' to comply with the duty and related rules.

The FCA expects senior managers to be responsible for ensuring the Consumer Duty is met across any business areas that they are responsible for, rather than mandating one senior manager as solely responsible under the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SM&CR). There will be a new rule requiring all conduct rules staff within firms to “act to deliver good outcomes for retail customers” where their firms’ activities fall within scope of the Consumer Duty. 

In these circumstances, it would seem that the implementation process will be similar to preparation for the introduction of 'Treating Customers Fairly' principle as well as SM&CR, but the FCA will expect  to see more evidence of the impact of the higher standard both culturally and in terms of changes to organisation, policies, processes and procedures. 

The scale of change should therefore be 'seismic'. But whether it will actually deliver better outcomes for consumers remains to be seen... 

Please let me know if you would like any help.

 

The FCA's New 'Consumer Duty'

The UK's Financial Conduct Authority is consulting on the introduction of a new "consumer duty" that will apply to regulated firms in relation to their regulated activities by 31 July 2022. This follows the report on a previous consultation in April 2019. The FCA is holding a webinar on the proposals on 10 June 2021; and comments will be open until 31 July 2021. The rules would be consulted on by 31 December 2021. Please let me know if I can help.

Broadly, this would require firms to act in ways that enable retail customers to obtain the outcomes they should be able to expect from the firm's products and services, rather than to hinder customers obtaining those outcomes. This effectively puts firms (and, significantly, the FCA) in the customers' shoes. 

This may require some firms to radically alter their culture and behaviour to focus on consumer outcomes, and putting customers in a position to act and make decisions in their own interests. 

There will be three elements to the new duty:

• A new consumer principle: "a firm must act in the best interests of retail clients" or "a firm must act to deliver good outcomes for retail clients". 
• Broad rules that would require firms to take all reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable harm to customers and enable customers to pursue their financial objectives; to act in good faith. 
• More detailed rules and guidance on firms' conduct relating to four specific outcomes: communications; products and services; customer service; and price and value. 

The FCA is also consulting on the potential benefits of attaching a private right of action to the new duty, and what any unintended consequences of this might be. 

Critics of the FCA's approach to consumer outcomes in the wake of various 'scandals' over the years will be hopeful that this new duty will see the FCA aligned with consumers, rather than tending to protect its own reputation, the 'financial services industry' and the firms its regulates.

FCA Applies More Handbook Rules To E-money and Payment Services

With the prospect of a disorderly Brexit looming large, the FCA is consulting on proposals to extend its Principles for Business and customer communication rules to e-money and payment services, whether they are provided by banks, e-money/payment institutions or registered account information service providers. There are also new rules and guidance for currency exchange transfer services. The consultation closes on 1 November 2018, with a view to publishing the final rules by the end of January 2019, to apply from 1 April.  Some rules will not apply to incoming EEA firms, and it remains to be seen whether the European Commission or other EU member states will view the extension of these rules as infringing the 'maximum harmonisation' approach to the regulation of payment services and/or regulatory divergence by the UK post-Brexit. But with the end of financial services passporting, anyway, perhaps the FCA no longer cares - and most firms seem to have started setting up their EEA passport hubs in other EU member states in any event.

Generally, the supply of e-money services is governed by the Electronic Money Regulations 2011 ("EMRs"), which implement the second E-money Directive; and both e-money and payment services are governed by the Payment Services Regulations 2017 ("PSRs"), which implement the second Payment Services Directive.

While the FCA is the regulator appointed to supervise these regulations, most of its rules in the Handbook do not apply, as the E-Money and Payment Services Directives require 'maximum harmonisation' - consistent implementation in all member states to ensure a level playing field across the European Economic Area. However, the PSRs introduced some scope for the FCA to extend its rules to these services, essentially where they are not within the scope of the directives or inconsistent with the regulations or the principle of 'maximum harmonisation'.

While the PSRs prescribe certain information to be given to e-money and payment service customers, they do not create overriding obligations, or the possibility of regulatory redress, concerning the 'fair treatment' of customers, for example, or that firms' communications must be clear, fair and not misleading.  Some payment service providers have fallen foul of the UK's Advertising Standards codes, however.

Accordingly, the FCA considers there is scope to apply its Principles for Businesses and associated guidance which create general management obligations for payment services firms, including the requirement to 'treat customers fairly'; as well as the rules and guidance in BCOBS 2 set out the FCA's expectations of firms when communicating about, or promoting, their services to customers. The specific application of these rules to e-money and payment services is explained in Chapter 3 of the consultation paper.

In addition, the proposed new rules and guidance concerning currency exchange transfer services are designed to enable the FCA to sanction misleading communications to consumers, the exchange rates they can achieve, the cost of those services and comparing alternative providers’ fees. These proposals are explained in Chapter 4 of the FCA's paper.

It remains to be seen whether the European Commission will view the FCA's proposals as cutting across the principle of maximum harmonisation, and its specific efforts to improve the transparency and fairness around payment services, including currency exchange services.

But with the prospect of a disorderly Brexit looming large, and the end of financial services passporting, perhaps the FCA no longer cares...  Most firms seem to have started setting up their EEA passport hubs in other EU member states in any event.

FCA Launches PSD2 Navigator

The Financial Conduct Authority has always led its EU counterparts in explaining its approach to regulating payment services, and continues to do so in spite of Brexit. 

The FCA had already published its "Approach" document for the new Payment Services Regulations 2017 (incorporating its approach to supervising the Electronic Money Regulations 2011) and has now launched a higher level web page to help navigate the impact and benefits of the new regulations.

This will be of most help to firms offering the new "account information services" and "payment initiation services", as well as retailers operating loyalty programmes that transact over €1 million in any 12 month period starting from 13 January 2018 and various other exclusions.

It is important to consider at the outset, however, whether your firm is offering payment services as a regular occupation or business.

FCA to Regulate All Employees Of Financial Firms

The Financial Conduct Authority is consulting on the extension of its "Senior Managers and Certification Regime" (SM&CR) to all firms that are regulated by the FCA under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (which excludes e-money/payment institutions, for example, unless they have dual authorisations).

This will replace the "Approved Persons" regime and extend some requirements to all employees. 

Consultation ends on 3 November, and the extension is likely to take effect from early in 2018. 

This means you should study the proposals and begin to plan how to comply, particularly as HR staff/advisers will also need to be involved.

FCA Publishes Final Approach and Rules Implementing #PSD2

The FCA has today published its final policy statement on how it will supervise the Payment Services Regulations 2017 (implementing the second Payment Services Directive, or PSD2).

I haven't digested it fully yet, but following earlier consultations, the FCA explains that it has amended its approach in various respects, particularly, its perimeter guidance on the new account information services and payment initiation services, complaints handling and reporting and conduct of business requirements. There is a table summarising the updates on page 6 of the policy statement.

I may post on any significant changes separately.

Further updates will be required when certain regulatory/implementing technical standards (RTS/ITS) and EBA Guidelines are finalised in late 2017 and early 2018, including EBA Guidelines on operational and security risk, and fraud reporting.

In the meantime, various draft application forms for authorisation and reporting have been published, with the final versions to be available for applications from 13 October 2017.  As explained in my earlier post, the FCA recommends waiting until then, even if you are making an application under the current regulations - otherwise it will need to be updated or re-assessed.

Top Tip: Make Any UK Applications Under #PSD2 From 13 October 2017

The FCA has published several web pages explaining the new authorisation/registration process under the Payment Services Regulations 2017 ("PSRs 2017") and similar process in the existing Electronic Money Regulations 2011 ("EMRs") that are updated by the new PSRs 2017. Basically, firms are "strongly encouraged" by the FCA to make their applications on or after 13 October 2017.

For payment institutions:

"You will be able to submit applications under PSD2 from 13 October 2017, giving you the opportunity to become registered or authorised under the PSRs 2017 from 13 January 2018.

Rather than applying under the PSRs 2009, you are therefore strongly encouraged to make your application under the PSRs 2017, on or after 13 October 2017.

If you decide to apply under the PSRs 2009 and we have not determined your application by 13 January 2018, we will treat your application as being made under the PSRs 2017. This means you will be required to provide more information to us, as required under the new regime [which would likely slow the process down]. If we have determined your application under the PSRs 2009 by 13 January 2018, you will need to submit an application to re-register or become re-authorised under PSD2 and the PSRs 2017, and pay an additional application fee.

Businesses applying for re-authorisation under PSD2 will need to submit a complete application by 13 April 2018 in order to continue operating on or after 13 July 2018.

Businesses applying for re-registration will need to submit a complete application by 13 October 2018 in order to continue operating on or after 13 January 2019."

For e-money institutions:

"You will be able to submit applications under PSD2 and the amended EMRs, from 13 October 2017, giving you the opportunity to be registered or authorised under the new regime from 13 January 2018.

Rather than applying under the current EMRs, you are therefore strongly encouraged to make your application under PSD2 and the amended EMRs, on or after 13 October 2017.

If you decide to apply under the current EMRs and we have not determined your application by 13 January 2018, we will treat your application as being made under the amended EMRs. This means you will be required to provide more information to us, as required under the new regime [which would likely slow the process down]. If we have determined your application under the current EMRs by 13 January 2018, you will need to submit an application to re-register or become re-authorised under PSD2 and the amended EMRs, and pay an additional application fee.

Businesses applying for re-authorisation or re-registration under PSD2 will need to provide all the information we need with an application by 13 April 2018 in order to continue operating on or after 13 July 2018."

#FinTech Service Providers Must Proactively Support FCA Compliance

The FCA has finalised its new guidance to authorised firms on outsourcing to the 'cloud' and other third party IT services, which is mandatory for some firms but (strongly) advisory for others. Unfortunately, exactly what amounts to 'outsourcing' remains grey and short of examples, as do important issues such as the meaning of 'cloud' (largely a marketing term anyway), whether access to data centres is necessary and so on. Not only does that leave FCA staff and finance firms in doubt, but it leaves service providers exposed to the need for financial firms to suddenly switch providers where the FCA considers that guidelines should have been followed but have not been.

The FCA guidance says that outsourcing is "where a third party delivers services on behalf of a regulated firm". That suggests the service in question must effectively be part of the firm's service to its customers, like answering customer calls on the firm's behalf in a call centre, as opposed to, say, the supply of commercial IT hosting services for web sites, apps or back-office software etc., which the firm is not in the business of providing to customers. 

A table in the guidelines sets out an extensive process and related paper trail designed to show that a firm has outsourced a function appropriately.

So lack of clarity on the boundary between outsourcing and normal service provision means that some IT providers may not realise that a financial firm has incorrectly classified the use of its services; and/or the service provider may not be willing or able to help the regulated firm jump through the many hoops laid out in the FCA's guidance. 

As a result, service providers risk losing customers who are finance firms that have failed to grind through the FCA's requirements and have to re-run their outsourcing process.

For all practical purposes, this places the burden on IT service providers to clarify the nature of their offering and make sure they are ready to help their finance customers either explain why there is no outourcing or demonstrate compliance with the FCA's outsourcing guidelines.

Some might observe that this represents regulatory 'scope creep', since it effectively subjects outsourcing providers to FCA regulatory requirements even where they are not required to be authorised (and may even be based outside the UK). Whether this is ever challenged as being ultra vires - beyond the FCA's powers - remains to be seen, but it is certainly a cost of doing business with UK financial firms.

FCA Calls For Input On #P2Plending and #CrowdInvestment Rules

It's been two years since the FCA created specific rules governing peer-to-peer lending and crowd-investment in securities, and the FCA promised a review of those rules in 2016. That review has just begun with a call for input closing on 8 September. 

This comes at an important time for the industry, as the FCA's report reveals that it has only processed 9 of 97 applications for authorisation by P2P lending platforms (44 of which operate under a two year old interim permission) and only 9 firms have been authorised to join the 25 firms that were operating in the crowd-investment market during the FCA's interim review in 2015. This shows that the FCA authorisation process, and regulation itself, are significant 'choke points' in the development of innovative financial services, notwithstanding firm support for the sector from the Treasury and strong growth in supply and demand from consumers and small businesses on existing platforms. 

It remains to be seen whether the FCA will further complicate life for crowdfunding entrepreneurs and their customers or clear the regulatory path to facilitate the growth of alternatives to the declining supply of bank finance, likely to worsen post-Brexit...

RegTech Bottleneck?

The UK's Financial Conduct Authority is rightly proud of its Innovation Hub, Regulatory Sandbox and new "RegTech" approach, which includes "managing regulatory requirements more efficiently, and... how we can best support developments and potentially adopt some RegTech solutions ourselves."

But the figures suggest that either more resources are required or there has to be a quicker route to market for new firms.

Of 413 requests received as at February, about 215 firms (52%) obtained support from the FCA's Innovation Hub. But only 39 firms (18%) have either been authorised (18) or are going through the approval process (21).  And in a recent statement defending its record on processing applications for authorisation by P2P lending platforms, the FCA said that it has only processed 8 of 94 applications received (about 9%).

Something is gumming up the works!

In its statement on the P2P lending process, the FCA bravely claims that it is "taking a proportionate approach to regulation, recognising the need for consumers to be adequately protected and have the information they need". It has a deadline of 12 months to decide on applications (actually 6 months for complete applications). But it's not like these firms are trying to flout the law - they have willingly approached the FCA for approval. Indeed, the P2P lending industry spent years lobbying for regulation of the sector, which was introduced by the Treasury in early 2013 and took effect on 1 April 2014. Yet since then the FCA's figures suggest that over 40 new firms have applied to enter the market and 42 of them are unable to trade because their application to do so is yet to be approved. Another 44 firms are still relying on their interim permission by virtue of being licensed under the previous regulatory regime, and therefore (ironically) cannot offer the new Innovative Finance ISA because they are not yet fully authorised.

How many firms are able to persist against these regulatory headwinds remains to be seen, but the approach seems neither proportionate nor worthy of the FCA's ambition to foster innovation and competition for the benefit of consumers. So far, the traditional players remain pretty safely sheltered behind the FCA's regulatory wall.

Something must be done.

Either the FCA needs more resources or it must adopt a more expeditious approach to granting regulatory approval - a mechanism that allows firms to begin trading more quickly under certain thresholds, for example, as is the case with small payment institutions and small e-money institutions. Indeed, payment services firms enjoy their own regulatory regime (with a 3 month turnaround time for complete applications); and the P2P industry lobbied for that regime to be used as the basis for regulating their platforms - an approach which the French and Spanish have since adopted and the European Banking Authority supports.

Could The FCA Do More To Foster Innovation In Financial Services?

Previously I've suggested that two things are choking the flow of money to people and small businesses who need it: broken regulation and perverse incentives. So it's important to give some credit for work on both fronts.

Financial regulation remains overly complex, but at least some reforms have been made to welcome innovation and competition at the retail level. And the recent budget showed the government is keen to ensure that ISAs and pensions encourage people to put their eggs in more than one basket. The FCA has also done some impressive research into insurance add-ons.

However, for this momentum to be maintained, financial regulation must become even more welcoming of innovation and competition - and much simpler and transparent for everyone to understand. So here are seven suggestions:

1. Tailored rulebooks: By the FCA's own admission, about 10% of the rules spread throughout its giant, ever-expanding 'Handbook' are relevant to each regulated activity. But the FCA does not gather the relevant rules into 'tailored' rulebooks, as the FSA used to do. That means everyone must waste time and resources wading through the 90% of rules that don't apply to their given activity. But it's worth noting that the FCA still maintains the helpful “Approach” documents that explain its separate regimes for e-money and payment services. Why not adopt this same 'approach' in other areas?
2. Registered small firms option: The FCA authorisation process involves 6 to 9 months' work in advance of filing, at an estimated cost of £150,000 per firm (see note 10 from this Treasury/Cabinet Office workshop). It then takes another 3 to 12 months to become authorised, depending on the permission required. This makes funding the launch of a new financial service very expensive compared to an unregulated service, and the slow time to market increases the risk of failure (ironically). A 'registered small firms' option already exists in relation to e-money and payment services, and would reduce the cost and delay of market entry for firms preparing for full authorisation. It should be brought in more broadly.
3. Client-money banking platform: Many authorised firms are obliged to 'safeguard' their clients' money by keeping it separate from their own funds in 'segregated' bank accounts. UK banks can be particularly slow and uncooperative in opening these accounts, which delays time to market. This, along with the recent financial and IT problems amongst UK banks, suggests it might be wise to 'ring fence' segregated accounts on a separate platform, possibly under the supervision of the new Payments Regulator.
4. Small Investor Option: Any web designer will tell you that the more 'clicks' you put in the way of a consumer, the less likely it is the consumer will go through a process. So 'dialogue boxes' that require people to certify things or take tests to invest in bonds or shares will also deter them. That's a barrier to the adoption of new 'crowd-investment' services, which many people might prefer to try out with small amounts. In fact it's far easier to gamble on lotteries and bingo than it is to invest. So allowing people to be invited to invest up to, say, £250 in debt securities or shares per project on authorised crowd-investment platforms with a clear, fair and not misleading description of the risks, but without any form of certification, advice or appropriateness test would seem appropriate (see the French proposals for crowd-investment).
5. Platform-level regulation: current financial regulation operates on the basis of different types of activity related to certain types of legal instrument, regardless of the customer experience. However, the online 'marketplace' model is now being applied to many different types of financial service, enabling people to transact directly with each other in relation to payments, savings, loans and investments, for example. Insurance and other services will likely follow down this path. This offers the chance to removing doubt and duplication by regulating common operational risks with a single set of rules at the platform level, with relatively few extra rules for different types of instruments or different types of activity being financed.
6. FCA 'Sandbox': coupled with the registered small firms option, the FCA could maintain a more dynamic focus on innovation and competition if it offered a dedicated space or channel for evaluating new services - both inside and outside the regulated sphere - which would also help it decide whether to flex its rules to suit.
7. Seek solutions from outside the existing market: the FCA should not assume that every innovation is designed to circumvent the existing regime to the detriment of customers. There are plenty of entrepreneurs who have spotted opportunities created by poor banking and are trying to increase transparency and reduce costs. So where the FCA is aware of existing consumer detriment or other market problems, it could present these to the market in open 'innovation workshops' - similar to those fostered by the Treasury/Cabinet Office - and/or release them into its 'sandbox'.

Your thoughts?