Compliance Radar
Who was sanctioned, and for what?
Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa: 2,207 cases from 44 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.
Click a bar to drill down one level.
Where?
by authority- Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) €37.9m 48 % · 3 cases
- Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) €31m 39 % · 11 cases
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) €7.24m 9 % · 8 cases
- Gambling Commission €3.32m 4 % · 2 cases
- Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) für die Gas and Electricity Markets Authority €251,766 0 % · 1 case
- High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts (Klägerin: Competition and Markets Authority) – 0 % · 1 case
- UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) – 0 % · 1 case
What for?
by topicWho?
by sectorAll sectors
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 1 | €2.75m |
| 2023 | 4 | – |
| 2024 | 8 | €54.1m |
| 2025 | 6 | €3.07m |
| 2026 | 8 | €19.8m |
27 cases
27 Jul 2026 Equity for Growth (Securities) Limited (in liquidation)FCA: Public censure for Equity for Growth (Securities) over misleading minibond promotions Reprimand or warning
The FCA publicly censured the corporate finance firm Equity for Growth (Securities) Limited. The FCA found that between January 2018 and August 2019 the firm approved seven information memoranda for four unregulated minibond issuers as financial promotions. In the FCA's view, these documents omitted key information, such as the level and range of commissions, so investors could not properly assess the risk. Because the firm was wound up by the court in March 2026 on the FCA's petition, no fine was imposed; the FCA stated that it would otherwise have been £386,467 (including disgorgement).
- Authority / court
- Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- COBS 4.2.1(1)R; section 205 FSMA 2000 (Public Censure)
- Action
- Reprimand or warning
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- FCA Final Notice: Equity for Growth (Securities) Limited (27 July 2026) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link
Report an error
30 Jun 2026 Petfre (Gibraltar) LimitedPetfre (Gibraltar): £900,000 over inadequate customer interaction in online gambling €1.04m
Following a compliance assessment in May and June 2024, the operator of betfred.com will pay £900,000 in lieu of a financial penalty to the Consolidated Fund (the UK Government's general account) under a settlement and contribute to the Commission's investigation costs. The Commission found breaches of the remote customer interaction requirements under SRCP 3.4.3: automated processes to identify signs of harm and to act immediately on strong indicators were lacking, so that one customer lost a further £17,900 within 24 hours of a review without being contacted again. The Commission had already announced sanctions against Petfre in 2022 and 2025.
After a sanction, customer interaction must be improved lastingly and demonstrably, or the next case follows.
Lasting improvement of customer interaction after earlier sanctions
- Authority / court
- Gambling Commission
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- s. 116 Gambling Act 2005; SRCP 3.4.3 Abs. 1, 2, 4, 7 und 11 der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Repeat case
- yes
- Mitigating circumstances
- A swift action plan with progress updates and full cooperation with the investigation.
- Published
- 30 Jun 2026
Original amount 900,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Jun 2026.
- Gambling Commission, Register of regulatory actions: Petfre (Gibraltar) Limited (Settlement 30.06.2026) Enforcement database of an authority
- Gambling Commission: Petfre (Gibraltar) Limited Public Statement Decision of an authority
- Gambling Commission: Petfre (Gibraltar) Limited to pay £900,000 for regulatory failures (30.06.2026) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
23 Jun 2026 TICKETBIS S.L. (StubHub UK)StubHub UK: 889,200 GBP penalty over mandatory fees added later €1.03m
The ticket exchange did not include mandatory fees in the total price at the start of the purchasing process. By way of a final infringement notice, the CMA imposed a penalty of 889,200 GBP (including a 40 % settlement discount) and required the company to refund the mandatory fees.
Ticket marketplaces must also show the total price including mandatory fees from the outset.
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Media and online platforms
- Mitigating circumstances
- Settlement with a 40 % discount and waiver of appeal.
- Published
- 23 Jun 2026
Original amount 889,200 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Jun 2026.
- StubHub UK: consumer protection enforcement case Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
15 Jun 2026 Marks Electrical LimitedCMA: GBP 720,000 fine for Marks Electrical over pre-selected extra services €832,534
Using its new powers under the DMCCA 2024, the CMA found that the electrical retailer had pre-selected and charged customers on its website for paid extra services (removal of the old appliance, packaging disposal) without their express consent during the period examined, April to November 2025. It imposed a fine of GBP 720,000 (GBP 1,200,000 before a 40% settlement discount) and required the company to refund the amounts charged in this way to affected customers (around GBP 600,000 according to the CMA).
Paid add-ons must never be pre-selected in an online shop – since the DMCCA, the CMA can impose fines and order refunds itself.
Pre-selected extra charges in online shops
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail
- Legal basis
- Regulation 40 Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013; Chapter 4 Part 3 Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Mitigating circumstances
- 40% discount for admission and settlement (including waiver of appeal); the practice was stopped on the day the investigation was opened.
- Published
- 18 Jun 2026
Original amount 720,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jun 2026.
- CMA case page: Marks Electrical: consumer protection enforcement case Enforcement database of an authority
- CMA: Final Infringement Notice, Marks Electrical Limited, Case 51652 (15 June 2026) Decision of an authority
- CMA press release: CMA orders Marks Electrical to refund customers over pre-selected extra charges (18 June 2026) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
3 Jun 2026 OVO Energy LimitedOfgem: OVO pays GBP 10.4m over poor support for vulnerable prepayment customers €12m
Ofgem found that OVO Energy did not adequately monitor prepayment customers in vulnerable situations, did not properly support customers who self-disconnected and did not maintain the Priority Services Register properly; some internal training materials were unclear and contradictory. By way of alternative action, OVO is paying GBP 7m into the voluntary redress fund and providing GBP 3.4m in credit and debt relief to its most vulnerable customers; under a separate compliance engagement it is also paying GBP 1.1m to customers in the Scottish Highlands and Islands.
Policies on paper are not enough: training materials and processes for vulnerable customers must be consistent and checked in practice.
Dealing with customers in vulnerable situations
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- Standard Licence Conditions 26.1, 26.4, 26.5(d)(f), 27A.1, 28.1A/28.1B, 28.2 und 28.4 der Gas- und Stromversorgungslizenzen
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Energy and utilities
- Mitigating circumstances
- Remedial action during the investigation, including welfare visits to customers who had been disconnected for more than 72 hours.
- Published
- 3 Jun 2026
Original amount 10,400,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Jun 2026.
- Ofgem: Decision to close investigation into OVO Energy Limited prepayment meter practices (3 June 2026) Decision of an authority
- Ofgem press release: OVO agrees settlement in relation to Ofgem's investigation of its monitoring of prepayment meter customers (3 June 2026) Press release of an authority
- Ofgem enforcement case: OVO Energy: prepayment meter practices Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
22 May 2026 Emma Matratzen GmbH, Emma Sleep UK Limited, Emma Sleep GmbHHigh Court: Emma Sleep agrees to end pressure-selling tactics after CMA claim Order
On a claim brought by the CMA, the High Court made a consent order in which the Emma companies accepted that they had used misleading countdown timers, inaccurate high-demand messages and misleading discount claims. They gave undertakings to the court that are enforceable and must put compliance measures in place with reporting to the CMA; the dispute over was/now reference pricing was tried separately, and in its judgment of 30 July 2026 the court found only the admitted infringements.
Artificial time pressure and apparent scarcity in an online shop are an enforcement risk, up to contempt sanctions, even for foreign sellers with UK customers.
Misleading urgency and discount claims in online retail
- Authority / court
- High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts (Klägerin: Competition and Markets Authority)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- section 217 Enterprise Act 2002 (Enforcement order wegen Schedule 13 Infringements)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Published
- 28 May 2026
- High Court of Justice, Claim No FS-2024-000004, CMA v Emma Matratzen GmbH and others: Consent Order (22 May 2026) Court decision
- CMA case page: Emma Group: consumer protection case Enforcement database of an authority
- CMA press release: Court endorses CMA action as Emma Sleep agrees to change sales practices (28 May 2026) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
15 Apr 2026 Automobile Association Developments Limited (AA Driving School, BSM Driving School)AA and BSM driving schools: 4.2 million GBP for drip pricing – CMA's first consumer fine €4.83m
For online bookings, the driving schools only showed a mandatory booking fee at checkout instead of in the initial price. Following an admission and settlement, the CMA imposed a penalty of 4.2 million GBP (40 % discount on 7 million GBP) and ordered refunds of more than 760,000 GBP to more than 80,000 customers. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2026, the company had around 6,776 employees.
Mandatory fees must be included from the very first price – in the United Kingdom, the CMA has been able to impose fines for this itself since 2025.
Price disclosures and mandatory fees at online checkout
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Employees
- 1,000 to 9,999
- Mitigating circumstances
- Admission and early settlement (40 % discount).
- Published
- 15 Apr 2026
Original amount 4,200,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Apr 2026.
- CMA orders the AA and BSM driving schools to refund learner drivers over drip pricing Press release of an authority
- Companies House: Registereintrag Automobile Association Developments Limited (01878835) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link
Report an error
20 Mar 2026 Conclusive Financial Limited (auch „PCP Refunds“)FCA orders Conclusive to remove misleading adverts for motor finance claims Order
The FCA directed the claims management company Conclusive Financial Limited, which also trades as “PCP Refunds”, with immediate effect to remove adverts for motor finance compensation claims and to refrain from similar adverts in future. The adverts used, without permission, edited video clips of the founder of a well-known consumer finance website as well as the FCA logo, presented the firm's authorised status as a mark of quality, cited an unsubstantiated average refund of 1,846 GBP and did not adequately explain the fees charged for its “No Win, No Fee” service.
Financial promotions must not borrow trust from celebrities or regulators' logos, nor promise unsubstantiated average amounts.
Compliant advertising on social media; no use of celebrities or regulators' logos
- Authority / court
- Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- s. 137S FSMA 2000; CMCOB 3.2.1R, 3.2.7R und 3.2.9R
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Published
- 14 Apr 2026
- FCA First Supervisory Notice to Conclusive Financial Limited, 20 March 2026 Decision of an authority
- FCA press release on misleading claims management adverts (14 April 2026) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
17 Dec 2025 PPB Entertainment Limited, PPB Counterparty Services Limited, Betfair Casino Limited u. a. (4 Lizenznehmer, Paddy Power Betfair)Paddy Power Betfair: £2m for identifying at-risk players too late €2.28m
Four online licensees trading as Paddy Power and Betfair (PPB Entertainment Limited, PPB Counterparty Services Limited, Betfair Casino Limited, TSE Malta LP) will pay a total of £2,000,000 in lieu of a financial penalty under a settlement and contribute to the Commission's investigation costs. An assessment in April and May 2024 found that their customer interaction systems identified signs of harm such as rapidly rising deposits or very long gambling sessions too late; one customer, for example, staked £86,000 within 16 days without a manual account review. The company had already been penalised in 2023 for marketing to vulnerable customers.
Automated triggers alone are not enough: where there are clear signs of harm, a person must intervene promptly.
Manual review where there are clear signs of harm rather than relying solely on automation
- Authority / court
- Gambling Commission
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- s. 116 Gambling Act 2005; SRCP 3.4.3 Abs. 1, 4, 7, 8 und 11 der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Repeat case
- yes
- Mitigating circumstances
- Full cooperation, early acceptance of the failings and swift implementation of an action plan.
- Published
- 17 Dec 2025
Original amount 2,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Dec 2025.
- Gambling Commission: Paddy Power Betfair to pay £2m for regulatory failures (17.12.2025) Press release of an authority
- Gambling Commission: Paddy Power Betfair Public Statement (17.12.2025) Decision of an authority
- Gambling Commission: Register of regulatory actions (All regulatory actions) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
10 Dec 2025 Euro Car Parks LimitedCMA: GBP 473,000 fine for Euro Car Parks for ignoring an information notice €541,128
Euro Car Parks left a formal CMA information notice served in July 2025 unanswered for around three months despite repeated attempts at contact, later saying it had blocked the authority's emails as suspected fraud. The CMA did not accept this as a reasonable excuse and, in its first penalty under the new DMCCA powers, imposed a fixed penalty of GBP 473,000; the company has appealed to the High Court, and no breach of consumer law has been found. The decision is not final.
Information requests from authorities must reliably reach the right people and be answered on time – suspecting spam or fraud is no excuse.
Handling information requests from authorities
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- Schedule 5 paragraph 16C(2) Consumer Rights Act 2015 (geändert durch den Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- under appeal
- Sector
- Transport, logistics and shipping
- Published
- 13 Feb 2026
Original amount 473,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Dec 2025.
- CMA decision page: Euro Car Parks Ltd fixed penalty Enforcement database of an authority
- CMA: Final enforcement notice to Euro Car Parks Limited (10 December 2025) Decision of an authority
- CMA press release: CMA fines Euro Car Parks £473k for failure to comply with legal information notice (13 February 2026) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
25 Sep 2025 TicketmasterTicketmaster commits to price transparency following Oasis presale Order
The CMA objected that, during the Oasis presale, fans in the queue were not told that standing tickets were being sold at two price levels, and that "Platinum" tickets cost almost 2.5 times as much without it being adequately explained that they offered no added value compared with some standard tickets. Without admitting liability, Ticketmaster gave undertakings: advance notice of tiered pricing, price ranges in the queue, no misleading ticket descriptions and a two-year reporting obligation.
Disclose dynamic or tiered prices before purchase; product descriptions must not suggest added value that does not exist.
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Britisches Verbraucherschutzrecht (Verfahren nach den vor April 2025 geltenden Befugnissen; Verpflichtungszusagen)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Media and online platforms
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Mitigating circumstances
- Undertakings without admission of liability.
- Published
- 25 Sep 2025
- CMA secures changes from Ticketmaster following Oasis tickets investigation Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Jun 2025 Farringdon Energy Limited (Handelsname Champion Energy)Ofgem: GBP 214,580 fine for Farringdon Energy over direct debits without supply €251,766
Ofgem found that the business electricity supplier lacked robust, documented processes – they relied on the knowledge of a single employee – and therefore collected direct debits from customers it was not, or no longer, supplying; 25 customers suffered a detriment of around GBP 175,000. Following a provisional order in May 2024, the authority confirmed a penalty of GBP 223,676, from which it deducted GBP 9,096 in goodwill payments already made, leaving GBP 214,580 to pay.
Even micro-businesses need documented processes – knowledge held by only one employee is not compliance.
Documented processes instead of knowledge held by one person
- Authority / court
- Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) für die Gas and Electricity Markets Authority
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- Standard Licence Condition 4A.1 der Stromversorgungslizenz; section 27A Electricity Act 1989
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Energy and utilities
- Employees
- Under 50
- Mitigating circumstances
- Remedial action after the provisional order; goodwill payments of GBP 9,096 already made were credited.
- Published
- 19 Jun 2025
Original amount 214,580 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Jun 2025.
- Ofgem enforcement case: Notice of penalty: Farringdon Energy Limited (19 June 2025) Enforcement database of an authority
- Ofgem/GEMA: Notice of decision to impose a financial penalty on Farringdon Energy Limited (16 June 2025) Decision of an authority
- Companies House: Farringdon Energy Limited, accounts for the period ended 31 October 2024 Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
6 Jun 2025 AmazonAmazon commits to the CMA to tougher action against fake reviews Order
Following an investigation into fake reviews and "catalogue abuse" (transferring good reviews to other products), Amazon undertook to the CMA to detect and remove such reviews quickly, to sanction infringing sellers up to and including a ban on selling, and to set up simple reporting channels.
Anyone who publishes reviews must maintain active processes against fakes and the transfer of reviews.
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Fake reviews
- Legal basis
- Enterprise Act 2002, Part 8 (Verpflichtungszusagen nach altem Durchsetzungsregime)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Mitigating circumstances
- Voluntary undertakings without a fine.
- Published
- 6 Jun 2025
- Amazon gives undertakings to CMA to curb fake reviews Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
24 Jan 2025 GoogleGoogle commits to the CMA to tougher action against fake reviews Order
Google undertook to the CMA to improve the detection and removal of fake reviews, to ban repeat offenders worldwide, to place warnings on business profiles with manipulated reviews and deactivate their review function, and to set up simple reporting channels; the CMA will monitor implementation for three years.
Companies that buy reviews risk visible warnings and the loss of their reviews on platforms.
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Fake reviews
- Legal basis
- Britisches Verbraucherschutzrecht (Verpflichtungszusagen)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Media and online platforms
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Mitigating circumstances
- Voluntary undertakings without a fine.
- Published
- 24 Jan 2025
- CMA secures important changes from Google to tackle fake reviews Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
20 Nov 2024 E.ON NextOfgem: E.ON Next pays GBP 14.5m over missing final bills for prepayment customers €17.4m
Because of a billing system error, former prepayment customers of E.ON Next did not receive final bills on time between February 2021 and September 2023; more than 248,000 customer accounts were affected, credit balances were not refunded and mandatory compensation was not paid. After self-reporting, the company paid GBP 14.5m in total (4.7m in credit refunds, 6.6m in compensation under the Guaranteed Standards of Performance and 3.2m in additional redress) and also wrote off the debts of almost 150,000 former customers.
Billing errors for departing customers quickly add up to millions – final bills and credit refunds need automated controls.
Billing and refund duties towards vulnerable customers
- Authority / court
- Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- Standard Licence Condition 27.17 der Gas- und Stromversorgungslizenzen; Guaranteed Standards of Performance Regulations
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Energy and utilities
- Mitigating circumstances
- Self-reporting, commendable engagement in the compliance process and the company's past performance were taken into account in setting the redress; the billing systems were corrected.
- Published
- 20 Nov 2024
Original amount 14,500,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Nov 2024.
- Ofgem decision: E.ON Next pay a total of £14.5m to former prepayment meter customers due to a failure to issue final bills (20 November 2024) Decision of an authority
- Ofgem press release: E.ON Next pay £14.5m for prepayment billing failures (20 November 2024) Press release of an authority
- Ofgem: Fines and redress payments from 2015 (XLSX) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
13 Nov 2024 Opus Energy LimitedOfgem: Opus Energy pays GBP 7.08m after overcharging business customers €8.48m
Opus Energy self-reported that two faults in its billing system had led to overcharging on 87,825 business customer accounts between 2003 and 2023, for example through wrong tariffs or duplicated billing periods. Ofgem found breaches of the licence conditions on fair treatment, operational capability and billing based on meter readings; Opus is paying a package of GBP 7,077,077 in total, made up of GBP 3,914,531 in refunds, GBP 1,597,058 in inflation uplift, GBP 1,304,555 in goodwill payments and GBP 260,933 to the energy industry voluntary redress fund.
Billing systems need regular audits – small individual errors grow into millions over the years.
Billing accuracy and control of IT systems
- Authority / court
- Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- Standard Licence Conditions 0A, 4A und 21B der Gas- und Stromversorgungslizenzen
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Energy and utilities
- Mitigating circumstances
- Self-reporting, full cooperation and swift remediation; according to Ofgem the package would otherwise have been higher.
- Published
- 13 Nov 2024
Original amount 7,077,077 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Nov 2024.
- Ofgem decision: Ofgem closes compliance engagement with Opus Energy in relation to overcharging of customers (13 November 2024) Decision of an authority
- Ofgem press release: Opus Energy to pay £7 million for overcharging business customers (13 November 2024) Press release of an authority
- Ofgem: Fines and redress payments from 2015 (XLSX) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
21 Oct 2024 Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) LimitedFCA: £5.4m fine for Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) over treatment of customers in financial difficulty €6.48m
The FCA fined the motor finance provider Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) Limited £5,397,600. The FCA found that between January 2017 and July 2023 the company did not treat customers in financial difficulty fairly, did not adequately consider their individual circumstances and in some cases repossessed cars that customers relied on for work; complaints were also not properly identified. At least 109,589 customers suffered or were at risk of detriment. The fine includes a 30% discount.
- Authority / court
- Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- FCA Principles 3, 6 und 7; CONC 7.2.1R, 7.3.4R, 7.3.9R, 7.3.14R(1); DISP 1.3.1R; section 206 FSMA 2000
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
Original amount 5,397,600 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 Oct 2024.
- FCA Final Notice: Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) Limited (21 October 2024) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Oct 2024 a UK retail bankFCA: £10.9m fine for UK retail bank over treatment of customers in arrears €13m
The FCA fined a UK retail bank £10,910,500. The FCA found that between June 2014 and March 2020 the bank treated some retail customers in arrears or financial difficulty on mortgages, loans, credit cards or overdrafts unfairly, including potentially vulnerable customers. 232,849 customers suffered or were at risk of loss; the company paid around £99.9 million in redress. This case is separate from the fine against the company over its 2018 IT migration. The fine includes a 30% discount.
- Authority / court
- Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- FCA Principles 3 und 6; section 206 FSMA 2000
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
Original amount 10,910,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Oct 2024.
- FCA, Final Notices (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2024) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Company name anonymised since 9 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Aug 2024 a Cypriot CFD providerFCA: £276,100 fine for Cypriot CFD provider over unfair treatment of CFD customers €322,140
The FCA fined a Cypriot CFD provider £276,100. The FCA found that between January and April 2021 the firm's account managers pushed often inexperienced UK retail customers into trading risky leveraged contracts for difference and gave investment advice without permission to do so. According to the FCA, UK customers lost around £4.4 million in that period. The fine was significantly reduced because of proven serious financial hardship; £1,736,000 had originally been proposed.
- Authority / court
- Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- FCA Principle 6; section 20(1) FSMA 2000; section 206 FSMA 2000
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
Original amount 276,100 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Aug 2024.
- FCA, Final Notices (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2024) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 9 Aug 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
15 Jul 2024 a UK online voucher platformCMA: voucher platform changes countdown marketing and refunds over GBP 4m Other
Following CMA concerns about countdown timers, scarcity and popularity claims and sign-ups to a paid VIP membership via pre-ticked boxes, the platform's companies gave formal undertakings. They now use only accurate urgency and scarcity claims, no longer use pre-ticked boxes for VIP membership and are refunding the fees – according to the CMA, more than GBP 4m in total to more than 870,000 customers as credit with the option to convert to cash.
Countdown timers and scarcity claims must reflect reality, and paid memberships require active consent.
Artificial urgency and pre-ticked boxes in online retail
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Part 8 Enterprise Act 2002 (Undertakings gegenüber der CMA); Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008; Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Published
- 19 Jul 2024
- CMA, Fälle (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2024) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 15 Jul 2026 · Direct link