Blog
FCA signals streamlining of its own processes and toughening up of the regulatory gateway
Jill Lorimer
In September 2020 we wrote about whether there should be a right to banking, and the possibly unintended consequences of banking facilities being withdrawn or frozen.
We discussed N v RBS and the large fine levied against Deutsche Bank as a result of operating accounts on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. As we explained, the issue caused by banks taking a more stringently risk-averse approach (‘de-risking’) was the increasing number of people excluded from the banking systems which, with more and more transactions occurring online and the decreasing use of cash, had the effect of excluding or marginalising people from swathes of society as well as causing difficulties if such parties needed to instruct lawyers to provide advice. A customer excluded from regular banking facilities might still need to process transactions, but the net effect of the exclusion could cause them to rely on non-standard and alternative methods of transferring funds. Rather than making payments safer and better regulated, and reducing the risk of money laundering and the financing of terrorist activities, this use of underground or unregulated and unmonitored spheres is therefore likely to have the opposite effect: making it harder to detect and report suspicious activity.
Concern about de-risking practices and financial exclusion is not new. In February 2016, the FCA published a statement saying that it was aware that some banks no longer offer financial services to entire categories of customer they associate with a higher risk but that ‘effective money-laundering risk management need not result in wholesale de-risking’. The FCA recommended that banks should use ‘judgement and common sense’, saying ‘this is what we would regard as an effective risk-based approach’.
International organisations have also sought to deal with this problem: the World Bank has been actively examining this issue for years, pointing out that ‘de-risking can frustrate AML/CFT [combating the financing of terrorism] objectives and may not be an effective way to fight financial crime and terrorist financing’. The G20 High-Level Principles for Digital Financial Inclusion strongly encourage a risk-based approach as opposed to de-risking entire categories of customers or accounts.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) is the latest body to recognise and seek to address this problem. In March it observed the increasing amount of de-risking being undertaken by banks and financial institutions and the impact this had on issues of customer protection and financial stability. On the basis of these observations and an information-gathering exercise, it published three regulatory instruments designed to deal with the problem. Echoing the guidance cited above, the instruments confirm that it is not necessary to refuse to provide facilities to entire categories of customer in order to comply with anti-money laundering obligations and counter terrorist financing. The instruments reiterate that the refusal of banking facilities could be an entirely appropriate approach to risk in certain circumstances, but that it could also be a sign of ineffective anti-money laundering and terrorist financing risk management: using a crane to crush a fly.
While recommendations that banks should take a risk-based approach (rather than take part in wholesale de-risking) are welcome, such guidance does nothing to address the commercial reality in which banks operate. Considering the possibility of heavy criminal sanctions and reputational risk against flaccid (albeit genuine) recommendations, it is clear where the balance lies.
One attempt at finding a solution to this problem can be found in the Payment Account Directive 2014/92, recognised by the EBA as imposing a conflicting requirement upon financial institutions. This provides the right to a basic payment account for those who are legally resident in the EU, predicated on the need to foster the participation of EU citizens in the internal market and its benefits. The directive was implemented in the UK by way of the Payment Account Regulations 2015 and, while the regulations were amended following Brexit so that the EU is now treated as a third country, the right to a basic payment account for those legally resident in the UK has been retained in UK law, subject to eligibility criteria.
The regulations require the provision of basic accounts to ensure no one is discriminated against, including those with no fixed address, asylum seekers and those without residence permits. These are parties who, by their very nature, are likely to be considered higher risk and therefore more likely to be denied an account. The regulations also make it clear that such a basic account can only be terminated in specific circumstances such as non-compliance with anti-money laundering legislation, but not because undertaking the necessary checks is time-consuming or otherwise onerous. While a step in the right direction, the regulations lack teeth: a refusal to open an account may result in a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, but this would be unlikely to give any bankers a sleepless night.
It is clear a problem has been identified. The solution, however, remains elusive.
Posted with kind permission of the Law Society Gazette: 'De-risking and financial exclusion.'
Further information
If you have any questions about the topic of this blog, please contact Rebecca Niblock or Mary Young.
Latest blogs
From Certificates to Belief Statements: The CPS and the Limits of Forum Bar Intervention
The CPS’s June 2025 guidance on the forum bar marks a decisive narrowing of the circumstances in which prosecutor’s belief statements may be issued. Such statements (by which a domestic prosecutor expresses the view that the UK is not the most appropriate jurisdiction for prosecution) have often featured in litigation under sections 19B and 83A of the Extradition Act 2003.
Focusing on Prosecuting Corporates: joint SFO – CPS Guidance released
On 18 August 2025, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) published their Joint SFO-CPS Corporate Prosecution Guidance, intended for prosecutors who will make decisions about whether or not to prosecute a corporation.
Preparing for changes to non-disclosure agreements from 1 October 2025
In June the Ministry of Justice announced new legislation under the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 which affects NDAs and confidentiality clauses.* Related guidance, published at the beginning of June, sets out the impact of this legislation on the enforceability of such agreements.
Why the Leveson Review Is Significant For UK Court System
The Leveson review has been billed as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reform the court system, with 45 recommendations being presented to Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood.
OfS Condition E6: a first step towards a unified approach to harassment and sexual misconduct, but does it go far enough?
In July 2024 the Office for Students (OfS) published guidance on a new condition of registration dealing specifically with harassment and sexual misconduct. That condition, ‘E6’, comes into force on 1 August 2025. As such, universities and colleges have had a year to ensure they comply.
The Insolvency Service: Repackaging Old Strategies for New Successes with Major Partner
On 16 July 2025, the Insolvency Service released its new five-year strategy towards tackling economic crime facilitated by companies to be implemented between 2026-2031. Despite an enthusiastic introduction to its plans as ‘ambitious’ and ‘transformational’, the four strategic pillars laid out in the strategy brief – to target more cases involving corporate structures and serious criminality; exploit emerging technology; collaborate closely with public and private sector partners; and recruit, retain and invest in its workforce – echo the agency’s existing commitments, as well as the aims of recently released strategies by adjacent organisations like the FCA, NECC and CPS.
New Child Safety Duties Under the Online Safety Act: What Online Platforms Must Know
As of 25 July 2025, new child safety duties under the Online Safety Act have come into force, requiring online platforms to implement robust safety measures to prevent children from accessing illegal or harmful content. The consequences for non-compliance are significant, making it essential for online providers to understand their new obligations.
A System Under Strain: Why It's Time to Rethink the UK’s Approach to Extradition and International Cooperation
As global crime evolves and political landscapes shift, the UK’s legal frameworks for international cooperation and extradition are showing their age. In a new blog, Rebecca Niblock explores the Criminal Law Reform Now Network (CLRNN) Scoping Review (June 2025) which makes a compelling case: the time for reform is now.
Modernising Cartel Enforcement: CMA launches consultation on updated leniency guidance
On 29 April 2025, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published a consultation on proposed revisions to its leniency guidance for cartel cases. The changes are intended to reflect legislative changes, align with current enforcement practices, and enhance the clarity, accessibility, and effectiveness of the CMA’s leniency regime.
New UK crypto regime takes a step closer
HM Treasury has published a draft statutory instrument which, when brought into force, will introduce a new regulatory regime for cryptoassets in the UK.
Five things to know about criminal risk in M&A transactions
Criminal risk isn’t the first thing that comes to mind when considering the commercial drivers behind a merger or acquisition. But our recent roundtable discussion at our offices made clear that criminal liability—however peripheral it might seem—can have very real consequences for deal viability and post-completion exposure. Here are five key takeaways from a discussion that brought together legal and business perspectives on how economic crime intersects with transactional work.
A tizzy over fizzy: how the Coca-Cola Company, and others, became recent targets of corporate “greenwashing” allegations
Whilst historically, climate-related litigation has been focused on governments, a report published last year by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment showcased how, in recent years, climate litigation is being initiated more frequently against corporations for alleged Environment, Social and Governance (“ESG”) failings
Adolescence is brilliant TV but Jamie should have sacked his brief
The new Netflix drama Adolescence has propelled many themes to the forefront of our national conversations in the last week. With the corrosive effect of social media on our children being the most important, it is hardly surprising that the realism of the portrayal of the criminal justice system in the series has been somewhat overlooked.
Adolescence: The ordinary family’s worst nightmare
As we await the release of the Netflix series Adolescence this evening by award winning writer Jack Thorne, I am interested to see how the series will deal with very real, yet often publicly unheard problems of how our criminal justice system, in particular the police, manage children who are alleged to have committed serious offences.
Is the FCA’s name and shame policy now dead in the water?
On 6 February the House of Lords Financial Services Regulation Committee published its response to the latest iteration of the FCA’s proposals to “name and shame” firms under investigation by the regulator.
The implementation of the Online Safety Act: understanding Ofcom’s new requirements
Following the enactment of the Online Safety Act (“OSA”) in October 2023, Ofcom has prepared a multi-stage plan for its implementation. Under this legislation, online service providers are subject to a number of new obligations, and Ofcom has a duty to ensure compliance with these requirements.
SFO Unexplained Wealth Orders – new focus for illicit finance?
On 17 January, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) secured its first Unexplained Wealth Order, in respect of a property believed to have been purchased with the proceeds of a £100 million fraud.
Sir Brian Leveson’s review of the courts
Whatever its cause, a backlog of over 73,000 Crown court cases is not acceptable. Delays for complainants, defendants and witnesses all impede justice. In the third quarter of 2024, the Crown court received over 31,683 new cases and disposed of 29,502. The passage of time will not solve the problem. Change is inevitable.
Increased Funding for INTERPOL’s CCF: Will it Solve the Delay Crisis?
A recent update on INTERPOL’s website is unlikely to raise eyebrows. The Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files (CCF) has acknowledged that it has been experiencing delays in meeting its deadlines due to an increased workload, both within the Commission and among other INTERPOL stakeholders. This will be all too familiar to those targeted by red notices and their representatives. Resourcing issues and delays have long plagued the CCF, despite operational rules requiring decisions on disclosure requests within four months and deletion requests within nine months.
The continued rise of sextortion and blackmail
In this article, Sandra Paul, a Partner at Kingsley Napley, looks at the rise of sextortion and blackmail, the legal landscape in regard to such offences and the need for the current protections to be reviewed and consolidated
You may also be interested in:
We welcome views and opinions about the issues raised in this blog. Should you require specific advice in relation to personal circumstances, please use the form on the contact page.
You may also be interested in:
Blog
COVID-19 Fraud: HMRC ramps up its investigations activity
Nicola Finnerty
Blog
The CMA’s Annual Report and digital markets - a time of change
Caroline Day
Share insightLinkedIn X Facebook Email to a friend Print