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.

74cases from 1 jurisdiction
€124.6mTotal of monetary amounts (58 cases with an amount)
€21.8mLargest single case: three gambling companies of a British group
€177,881Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by authority
  1. Gambling Commission €76.2m 61 % · 15 cases
  2. Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) €19.8m 16 % · 43 cases
  3. Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) €17.6m 14 % · 3 cases
  4. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) €4.83m 4 % · 1 case
  5. Leeds Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive) €2.85m 2 % · 1 case
  6. HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) €1.34m 1 % · 1 case
  7. HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) €562,409 0 % · 2 cases
  8. Department for Business and Trade (DBT) und HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), National Minimum Wage Naming Scheme €561,854 0 % · 1 case
  9. Environment Agency €496,364 0 % · 1 case
  10. Preston Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency) €92,442 0 % · 1 case
  11. 4 more€155,506

What for?

by area of law

All areas of law

  1. Money laundering and terrorist financing €72.9m 59 % · 14 cases
  2. Data protection €19.8m 16 % · 39 cases
  3. Capital markets and financial supervision €17.6m 14 % · 2 cases
  4. Consumer protection and online retail €8.15m 7 % · 3 cases
  5. Health and safety and employment law €3.48m 3 % · 4 cases
  6. Sanctions and export control €1.91m 2 % · 3 cases
  7. Environment and sustainability €591,988 0 % · 3 cases
  8. Whistleblower protection €82,264 0 % · 2 cases
  9. Information security and cyber – 0 % · 4 cases

Who?

by company
  1. Anonymised companies €70.7m 57 % · 42 cases
  2. Capita plc und Capita Pension Solutions Limited €16.1m 13 % · 1 case
  3. Platinum Gaming Limited €11.5m 9 % · 1 case
  4. Evolution Malta Holding Limited €5.57m 4 % · 1 case
  5. Automobile Association Developments Limited (AA Driving School, BSM Driving School) €4.83m 4 % · 1 case
  6. Biffa Waste Services Ltd €2.85m 2 % · 1 case
  7. Spreadex Limited €2.38m 2 % · 1 case
  8. PPB Entertainment Limited, PPB Counterparty Services Limited, Betfair Casino Limited u. a. (4 Lizenznehmer, Paddy Power Betfair) €2.28m 2 % · 1 case
  9. AG Communications Limited €1.43m 1 % · 1 case
  10. Britischer Exporteur (von HMRC nicht genannt, anonymisiert) €1.34m 1 % · 1 case
  11. 23 more€5.68m

When?

per year, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
20228€749,848
202322€51.2m
202414€19.4m
202517€39.8m
202613€13.3m

74 cases

14 Sep 2026 Fire Protection Recycling LimitedFire extinguisher explodes fatally during recycling – 40,000 GBP fine United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €46,730

While decommissioned powder extinguishers were being discharged in Oldbury in 2023, a cartridge-type extinguisher exploded and struck a 37-year-old employee on the head, fatally injuring him. There was no risk assessment, no safe system of work, no suitable storage and no restraint system for discharging; the recycling business (20 employees according to its annual accounts) was fined 40,000 GBP plus 17,034.25 GBP in costs.

What organisations can take from it

Carry out a documented risk assessment even for routine work with pressurised containers and provide technical restraints – experience is no substitute for a safeguard.

Authority / court
Birmingham Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 2(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Employees
Under 50
Published
17 Sep 2026

Original amount 40,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Sep 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

20 Aug 2026 QuinnBet (Gibraltar) LimitedQuinnBet: £415,986 over anti-money laundering and financial vulnerability check failings United KingdomInternal controls €485,256

The operator of quinnbet.com will pay £415,986 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 settlement also includes a disgorgement of £193,118, which is not included in the amount shown. A compliance assessment found breaches of the anti-money laundering licence condition LC 12.1.1 paras. 2 and 3 (March 2023 to August 2025) and of the customer interaction requirements under SRCP 3.4.3; following an error during a platform migration, some of the required financial vulnerability checks under SRCP 3.4.4 were also not carried out between February and May 2025. It is the first enforcement action against the company.

What organisations can take from it

Financial vulnerability checks are a licence requirement that must continue without gaps, including during technical changeovers.

Relevance to training and awareness

Financial vulnerability checks and AML controls in online betting

Authority / court
Gambling Commission
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
s. 116 Gambling Act 2005; LC 12.1.1 Abs. 2 und 3, SRCP 3.4.3 und SRCP 3.4.4 Abs. 1 der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Repeat case
no
Mitigating circumstances
No previous enforcement action, a swift action plan, full cooperation, early voluntary reporting of some of the failings, voluntary divestment of the funds gained from them and early acceptance of the failings.
Published
20 Aug 2026

Original amount 415,986 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

20 Aug 2026 Truro Sawmills LimitedCornwall sawmill ignores three improvement notices: 20,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €23,330

According to the HSE, the sawmill failed to protect employees from wood dust (no face-fit testing for respiratory protective equipment, no health surveillance) and let staff drive lift trucks without training; three improvement notices from the HSE (Health and Safety Executive, Britain's workplace safety regulator) were not complied with. The court fined the company, a micro-entity, 20,000 GBP plus 5,000 GBP in costs.

What organisations can take from it

Treat improvement notices from the regulator as binding deadlines, not recommendations; ignoring them risks a fine.

Relevance to training and awareness

Lift truck training and protection against wood dust

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Truro Crown Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 2(1) und Section 33(1)(g) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Employees
Under 50
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not reported here.
Published
21 Aug 2026

Original amount 20,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

23 Jul 2026 Evolution Malta Holding LimitedEvolution: £4.75m because its own games ran on unlicensed sites accessible in GB United KingdomInternal controls €5.57m

The games supplier will pay £4,750,000 in lieu of a financial penalty under a regulatory settlement, contribute to the Commission's investigation costs and accept an additional licence condition requiring an independent audit within twelve months. Five genuine Evolution games were accessible at scale to consumers in Great Britain via six websites of two operators not licensed by the Gambling Commission; between April 2024 and January 2025, its risk assessment and its anti-money laundering policies and controls did not adequately address risks arising from business partners in particular (LC 12.1.1, LC 12.1.2). After the Commission notified it in December 2024, Evolution immediately and permanently blocked the games for users in Great Britain.

What organisations can take from it

B2B suppliers must monitor where their products are actually offered and stop their use by unlicensed operators.

Relevance to training and awareness

Control over the distribution of own products to unlicensed operators

Authority / court
Gambling Commission
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
s. 116 Gambling Act 2005; LC 12.1.1 Abs. 1–3 und LC 12.1.2 der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP); Reg. 18, 19(1)(a) und 28(1) Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Mitigating circumstances
A swift action plan with progress updates, full cooperation with the investigation and early acceptance of the failings.
Published
23 Jul 2026

Original amount 4,750,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

8 Jul 2026 Hutchison Technologies LtdTribunal: Hutchison Technologies dismissed employee after she raised holiday pay concerns United KingdomRetaliation against whistleblowers Other

An employee of the Dundee-based electrical services provider for gyms (around 140 employees) had pointed out that the technicians' holiday pay was being calculated incorrectly; a few days later her home working arrangement was withdrawn, and on 11 June 2025 she was dismissed. The Employment Tribunal upheld her claims for automatically unfair dismissal (s. 103A) and detriment (s. 47B); compensation will be decided separately.

What organisations can take from it

Employers who worsen working conditions shortly after a disclosure must be able to prove a documented reason unrelated to the disclosure.

Relevance to training and awareness

How managers handle internal reports

Authority / court
Employment Tribunal
Area of law
Whistleblower protection · Retaliation against whistleblowers
Legal basis
Employment Rights Act 1996, ss. 43B, 47B, 103A
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Employees
50 to 249
Published
23 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

30 Jun 2026 Petfre (Gibraltar) LimitedPetfre (Gibraltar): £900,000 over inadequate customer interaction in online gambling United KingdomConsumer protection and online retail €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.

What organisations can take from it

After a sanction, customer interaction must be improved lastingly and demonstrably, or the next case follows.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

3 Jun 2026 Sonus Public Relations LtdTribunal: PR agency Sonus must pay £71,052 after subjecting whistleblower to detriment United KingdomRetaliation against whistleblowers €82,264

The PR agency, which did not appear, lost on all claims: detriment on grounds of whistleblowing (£20,000 for injury to feelings), wrongful termination without notice pay (£3,547.60) and constructive unfair dismissal (basic and compensatory award including a 25 % ACAS uplift). A total of £71,051.82 was awarded.

What organisations can take from it

Employers who do not take part in the proceedings risk, in addition to whistleblower compensation, an uplift for failing to follow the ACAS Code of Practice.

Relevance to training and awareness

How managers handle internal reports

Authority / court
Employment Tribunal
Area of law
Whistleblower protection · Retaliation against whistleblowers
Legal basis
Employment Rights Act 1996, s. 47B (Benachteiligung wegen geschützter Offenlegung); konstruktive unfaire Kündigung; wrongful dismissal
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Employees
Under 50
Published
22 Jul 2026

Original amount 71,051.82 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

20 May 2026 Marketing-Unternehmen, UK (anonymisiert)ICO: £300,000 fine for a marketing firm over spam and fake bailiff texts United KingdomMarketing and consent €346,600

The ICO fined a UK marketing company £300,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that the company had sent more than 5.5 million unsolicited marketing text messages, including messages styled as if they came from bailiffs. The 7726 spam reporting service received over 60,000 complaints. The ICO relied on regulations 22 and 23 of PECR (electronic marketing without consent and concealed sender identity).

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulations 22 und 23 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 300,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

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 United KingdomMisleading advertising and pricing €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.

What organisations can take from it

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.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

24 Mar 2026 3R Technology UK Ltd3R Technology UK: penalty for exporting contaminated plastic waste despite prohibition United KingdomWaste and hazardous substances €92,442

From 2022 to 2025, the company exported containers of supposedly clean plastic that was in fact contaminated with electronic waste such as cables and circuit boards; in some cases, the waste was hidden at the back of the container, and further containers were shipped despite prohibition notices from August 2024. The company pleaded guilty and was fined 80,000 GBP; in addition, it was ordered to pay 45,000 GBP in costs and a 2,000 GBP surcharge. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 19 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Incorrectly declared waste exports are detected during port inspections; those who ignore regulatory prohibitions risk a criminal conviction.

Relevance to training and awareness

Correct classification and declaration of waste for export

Authority / court
Preston Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
Legal basis
Vorschriften zur grenzüberschreitenden Abfallverbringung (Notifizierung und Zustimmung); Verstoß gegen Untersagungsverfügungen
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Employees
Under 50
Culpability
intentional
Repeat case
yes
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea.
Published
2 Apr 2026

Original amount 80,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 5 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

19 Mar 2026 Busy Bees Nurseries LimitedBusy Bees: £485,374 in minimum wage arrears owed to 9,056 nursery staff United KingdomMinimum wage and undeclared work €561,854

The UK Department for Business and Trade publicly named the nursery operator Busy Bees Nurseries Limited in round 23 of the National Minimum Wage Naming Scheme. According to investigations by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), the company had paid a total of 9,056 workers less than the statutory minimum wage between April 2017 and October 2022 and had to repay £485,374.05 – on average around £54 per person. According to the ministry, the 389 employers named in this round also received penalties totalling around £12.6 million; the amount per company is not published.

What organisations can take from it

Where many employees earn close to the minimum wage, regularly checking payroll against the applicable minimum rates is a must – small shortfalls per person add up to large arrears and public naming.

Relevance to training and awareness

Minimum wage compliance in payroll

Authority / court
Department for Business and Trade (DBT) und HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), National Minimum Wage Naming Scheme
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Minimum wage and undeclared work
Legal basis
Britisches Mindestlohnrecht (National Minimum Wage / National Living Wage); National Minimum Wage Naming Scheme
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Published
19 Mar 2026

Original amount 485,374.05 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

12 Mar 2026 Direktmarketing-Unternehmen, UK (anonymisiert)ICO: £130,000 fine for a direct marketing firm over calls to TPS numbers United KingdomMarketing and consent €150,737

In March 2026 the ICO fined a small UK direct marketing company £130,000 and also served an enforcement notice. According to the ICO, over almost eleven months in 2024 the company had staff make more than 230,000 marketing calls to lines that had been on the UK's opt-out register for sales calls (Telephone Preference Service, TPS) for over 28 days, prompting 12 complaints. The ICO treated this as a breach of regulation 21 of PECR.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulations 21 und 24 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 130,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

3 Feb 2026 TMAC LtdICO: £100,000 fine for TMAC over marketing calls to TPS numbers United KingdomMarketing and consent €115,969

The ICO fined TMAC Ltd £100,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that between 8 February and 24 September 2024 the company made 260,332 unsolicited marketing calls to numbers registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS). Recipients were also not given the caller details required by regulation 24 of PECR. The legal basis is regulations 21 and 24 of PECR.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulations 21(1)(b) und 24 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 100,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Feb 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

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 United KingdomConsumer protection and online retail €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.

What organisations can take from it

Automated triggers alone are not enough: where there are clear signs of harm, a person must intervene promptly.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

11 Dec 2025 ZMLUK LimitedICO: £105,000 fine for ZMLUK over unsolicited marketing emails United KingdomMarketing and consent €119,986

The ICO fined ZMLUK Limited £105,000. The ICO found that the company had sent unsolicited marketing emails for energy-saving products; the notice gives the period as 1 January to 21 July 2023. The ICO found a serious breach of regulation 22 of PECR (electronic marketing without consent). Under the notice, timely payment reduces the amount by 20% to £84,000.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 22 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 105,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Dec 2025.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

28 Nov 2025 Institute of Certified BookkeepersFCA: Public censure for Institute of Certified Bookkeepers over deficient AML supervision United KingdomMoney laundering and terrorist financing Reprimand or warning

The FCA, through its supervisor OPBAS, publicly censured the Institute of Certified Bookkeepers. The professional body is responsible for anti-money laundering supervision of more than 3,000 bookkeepers in the UK. The FCA found that between January 2022 and July 2023 it did not supervise its members effectively or on a risk basis; among other things it suspended inspections for more than nine months and did not keep adequate records of its supervision.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing
Legal basis
Regulation 16 Oversight of Professional Body AML and CTF Supervision Regulations 2017; Regulations 17 und 46 MLRs 2017
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

6 Nov 2025 Lead Pronto LtdICO: £30,000 fine for Lead Pronto over marketing texts about boiler grants United KingdomMarketing and consent €34,064

The ICO fined Lead Pronto Ltd £30,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that the company had sent unsolicited text messages promoting government-funded boiler grants. The ICO found a serious breach of regulation 22 of PECR (electronic marketing without consent).

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 22 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 30,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Nov 2025.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

15 Oct 2025 Capita plc und Capita Pension Solutions LimitedICO: £14 million against Capita after ransomware attack affecting 6.6 million people United KingdomData breaches and data security €16.1m

In March 2023, an employee unintentionally downloaded malicious files; although an alert was triggered after ten minutes, the device was only isolated after 58 hours. Attackers stole around one terabyte of data on 6.6 million people (including pension data and criminal record information). Fines imposed by the UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO): £8 million against Capita plc and £6 million against Capita Pension Solutions.

What organisations can take from it

Security alerts need binding response times and an adequately staffed SOC – known vulnerabilities must be remedied across the group.

Relevance to training and awareness

Handling malicious downloads and security alerts

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
UK GDPR Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. f, Art. 32
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Employees
10,000 or more
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
£45 million had provisionally been proposed; reduced, among other things, for security improvements, credit monitoring for those affected and cooperation with authorities and the NCSC.
Published
15 Oct 2025

Original amount 14,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Oct 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

15 Oct 2025 Biffa Waste Services LtdBiffa: £2.48m fine after fatal accident involving a reversing lorry United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €2.85m

Waste company Biffa was fined £2.48m and ordered to pay £5,768.06 in costs after a worker at its Bradford waste transfer station was struck and killed by a reversing skip wagon on 10 August 2023. The Health and Safety Executive found that the segregation of pedestrians and vehicles was not effectively monitored; CCTV showed that workers routinely bypassed the protected routes.

What organisations can take from it

Control measures on paper are not enough; whether they are actually followed must be monitored continuously.

Relevance to training and awareness

Traffic routes, reversing and supervision in yards

Authority / court
Leeds Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Reg. 5(1) Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea.
Published
17 Oct 2025

Original amount 2,480,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Oct 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

22 Sep 2025 Platinum Gaming LimitedPlatinum Gaming (Unibet): £10m fine for AML and player protection failings United KingdomInternal controls €11.5m

The Gambling Commission imposed a financial penalty of £10,000,000, a warning and an additional licence condition requiring an external audit on the operator of unibet.co.uk and uk.bingo.com. Between January 2023 and May 2024, its money laundering risk assessment did not take account of accounts previously closed over money laundering or terrorist financing concerns, so blocked customers could open new accounts; the AML policy was unclear about which level of due diligence applied when, and customers showing clear signs of harm were not contacted. It is the second enforcement action against the company, following one in 2023.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone closing accounts over money laundering concerns must technically prevent the same customers from returning with new accounts.

Relevance to training and awareness

Recognising blocked customers and timely customer interaction where there are signs of harm

Authority / court
Gambling Commission
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
LC 12.1.1 Abs. 1–3 und LC 12.1.2 sowie SRCP 3.4.3 der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP); s. 117(1)(a) und (b) Gambling Act 2005
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Repeat case
yes
Mitigating circumstances
The company cooperated throughout the investigation.
Published
22 Oct 2025

Original amount 10,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

Load 20 more of 54

Ready for training that actually lands?

Try the combination for free: automated administration for you, learning formats that fit your team, with no minimum or credit card.

Start 14-day free trial