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.

United Kingdom Clear all filters
390cases from 1 jurisdiction
€1.98bnTotal of monetary amounts (257 cases with an amount)
€316.9mLargest single case: a UK commodities trader
€496,828Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by authority
  1. Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) €558.5m 28 % · 58 cases
  2. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) €444.8m 22 % · 25 cases
  3. Serious Fraud Office (SFO); Southwark Crown Court €316.9m 16 % · 1 case
  4. Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England €200.5m 10 % · 8 cases
  5. Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) €139.2m 7 % · 9 cases
  6. Gambling Commission €76.2m 4 % · 15 cases
  7. Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) €70.9m 4 % · 157 cases
  8. Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) und Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) €55.6m 3 % · 1 case
  9. Bank of England €13.8m 1 % · 1 case
  10. Serious Fraud Office (SFO) €11.6m 1 % · 1 case
  11. 64 more€89m

What for?

by area of law

All areas of law

  1. Competition law €476.7m 24 % · 17 cases
  2. Money laundering and terrorist financing €428.8m 22 % · 36 cases
  3. Capital markets and financial supervision €373.4m 19 % · 36 cases
  4. Bribery and corruption €328.5m 17 % · 2 cases
  5. Information security and cyber €84.5m 4 % · 15 cases
  6. Consumer protection and online retail €79.7m 4 % · 27 cases
  7. Data protection €65.8m 3 % · 145 cases
  8. Environment and sustainability €58.3m 3 % · 29 cases
  9. Other €32.7m 2 % · 4 cases
  10. Health and safety and employment law €25.7m 1 % · 46 cases
  11. 3 more€23.1m

Who?

by sector

All sectors

  1. Financial services and insurance €940.6m 48 % · 87 cases
  2. Energy and utilities €500.5m 25 % · 35 cases
  3. Construction and real estate €191.1m 10 % · 29 cases
  4. Other €124.6m 6 % · 75 cases
  5. Automotive €92.9m 5 % · 2 cases
  6. Media and online platforms €37.5m 2 % · 9 cases
  7. Chemicals and pharmaceuticals €35.9m 2 % · 9 cases
  8. Defence and security €16.1m 1 % · 3 cases
  9. Manufacturing and mechanical engineering €10.3m 1 % · 10 cases
  10. Retail and e-commerce €9.25m 0 % · 22 cases
  11. 6 more€18.3m

When?

per year, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
202237€540.8m
202395€303.6m
202481€374.9m
202589€590m
202688€167.7m

390 cases

24 Sep 2026 M&J GroupCMA: fine against construction firm for concealing evidence during an inspection United KingdomCartels and collusion €29,075

During an inspection as part of an investigation into bid rigging, a work mobile phone and documents were removed from the premises on the instructions of a manager, and possession of a work mobile phone was denied. The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) imposed a fine of 25,000 GBP on M&J.

What organisations can take from it

Dawn raid training is mandatory: removing mobile phones or documents during an inspection obstructs the investigation, even when acting on instructions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Correct conduct during inspections (dawn raids), no removal of evidence

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Section 40A(1) Competition Act 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not reported here.
Published
24 Sep 2026

Original amount 25,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Sep 2026.

Sources

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.

22 Sep 2026 Southern WaterSouthern Water: 2.4 million GBP fine for sewage and diesel pollution in Kent United KingdomEmissions and permits €2.9m

Between 2019 and 2021, untreated sewage, sewage residues, diesel from a generator and waste entered a stream and the sea around Faversham and Whitstable; the circumstances of one incident were not reported to the Environment Agency, around 70 fish died, and bathing warnings were in place at beaches in Tankerton and Herne Bay for almost a week. The court imposed a fine of 2,416,666.67 GBP, 69,894.04 GBP in costs and a 190 GBP victim surcharge; it was the company's second conviction that year (announcement of 22 September 2026, exact date of judgment not stated). According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2026, the company had around 3,109 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Repeated pollution and failure to report incidents lead to a series of prosecutions with rising fines.

Relevance to training and awareness

Reporting environmental incidents to the regulator

Authority / court
Bromley Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulations 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Repeat case
yes
Published
22 Sep 2026

Original amount 2,486,750.71 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Sep 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.

16 Sep 2026 Hillbeck Homes (Sowerby Bridge) LtdDeveloper pays £300,000 after agency worker falls through unprotected stairwell opening United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €349,895

A 24-year-old labourer working as a temporary worker for a scaffolding company fell, in his second week of work on the developer's housing site, through a stairwell opening that was neither securely covered nor guarded, dropping one storey onto concrete and suffering serious spinal injuries. The court found the company guilty on three counts because it had neither adequately planned nor supervised work at height and had not taken suitable measures to prevent falls. Fine of £300,000 plus costs. The company is a micro-enterprise with fewer than 10 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Floor openings on construction sites must be covered with load-bearing covers or guarded at all times – new and temporary workers in particular do not know where the hazards are.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fall protection at openings; induction of new workers

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
Work at Height Regulations 2005
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Employees
Under 50
Published
21 Sep 2026

Original amount 300,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Sep 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.

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.

8 Sep 2026 United Utilities Water LimitedUnited Utilities: record fine of 900,000 GBP after sewage flood on the Fylde coast United KingdomEmissions and permits €1.12m

Following a partial pipe collapse at the Fleetwood wastewater treatment works, untreated sewage flowed from three pumping stations into the Irish Sea for over 35 hours in June 2023; seven bathing waters were affected and shellfish beds were closed. The water company pleaded guilty to five offences and must pay a fine of 900,000 GBP, 62,225 GBP in costs and a 2,000 GBP victim surcharge. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2026, the company had around 6,678 full-time equivalent employees.

What organisations can take from it

The condition and redundancy of critical wastewater infrastructure are a permit obligation; the Environment Agency assessed the failure as reckless and in the highest harm category.

Authority / court
Preston Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulation 38(2) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Around 38 million GBP invested in response and repair, and a voluntary payment of 250,000 GBP to Blackpool Council.
Published
8 Sep 2026

Original amount 964,225 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Sep 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.

4 Sep 2026 Samworth Brothers LimitedSamworth Brothers: £594,000 after two workers scalded at steam line United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €691,518

At the Kettleby Foods plant in Melton Mowbray, an employee and a contractor were scalded with hot water while replacing a leaking gasket on an isolation valve of a steam line (burns to 4–5 % and 9 % of their body surface respectively). The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the task had neither been assessed nor documented as a safe system of work, isolation and lock-off procedures had not been applied, fall protection was missing and supervision was inadequate. Following a guilty plea, a fine of £594,000, plus £6,000 compensation for the injured employee, costs and a victim surcharge.

What organisations can take from it

Maintenance on steam and pressure lines requires a written isolation and lock-off procedure that is supervised on site.

Relevance to training and awareness

Isolating and locking off equipment during maintenance (lockout/tagout)

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 Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
16 Sep 2026

Original amount 594,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Sep 2026.

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.

3 Sep 2026 B&Q LimitedB&Q: publicly named for minimum wage underpayment of 4,530 workers United KingdomMinimum wage and undeclared work €530,980

In the 24th naming round of the National Minimum Wage scheme, B&Q was listed first: the company had underpaid 4,530 workers by a total of £456,934.72 (period according to the list: 15 May 2020 to 31 March 2025). Named employers had to pay the arrears and additionally received penalties whose amount per employer is not published (around £7m for the whole round). The amount is the arrears ordered to be repaid, not a fine.

What organisations can take from it

Minimum wage errors in payroll quickly affect thousands of workers and are made public.

Relevance to training and awareness

Minimum-wage-compliant payroll

Authority / court
Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade / Fair Work Agency (Ermittlung: HM Revenue and Customs)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Minimum wage and undeclared work
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Published
3 Sep 2026

Original amount 456,934.72 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Sep 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 Sep 2026 BDW Trading (Barratt Redrow)Barratt Redrow subsidiary BDW pays 201,500 GBP to environmental projects after silt entered brooks United KingdomEmissions and permits €234,153

At the Ladden Garden Village construction site in Yate, a subcontractor washed silt from the site drainage into two brooks over six days in July 2022. The Environment Agency accepted an Enforcement Undertaking: BDW is paying 201,500 GBP to three environmental and charitable projects, bears the investigation costs and had already invested over 180,000 GBP in remediation, training and improved surface water management. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 5,217 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Developers are liable for environmental damage caused by their subcontractors; clear procedures and training on handling surface water prevent costly proceedings.

Relevance to training and awareness

Protecting watercourses on construction sites and managing subcontractors

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Environment Agency
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Environmental Civil Sanctions (England) Order 2010 (Enforcement Undertaking)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Mitigating circumstances
Acceptance of responsibility, remediation, training of employees and application for a discharge permit.
Published
3 Sep 2026

Original amount 201,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Sep 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.

1 Sep 2026 PPS Metal Recycling LtdScrapyard: £40,000 fine after metal pile collapses on father and son United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €46,699

In February 2025, a pile of scrap collapsed on a father and his son at the metal recycler's site while an excavator had been working near them for around 20 minutes; one of them suffered a broken leg. Pedestrians were separated neither from machinery nor from unstable stockpiles, even though there had been a near miss involving the same excavator shortly before. Fine of £40,000 plus £6,181 costs. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 18 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Companies that allow customers or visitors onto a site with machinery must physically separate pedestrians and vehicles and treat near misses as a warning sign.

Authority / court
Grimsby Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Steel and metals
Employees
Under 50
Mitigating circumstances
After the accident, a separate unloading zone, signage, supervised procedures and fenced-off walkways were introduced.
Published
2 Sep 2026

Original amount 40,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Sep 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.

25 Aug 2026 ExxonMobil Chemical LimitedExxonMobil Chemical: 267,000 GBP for five hydrocarbon leaks at Fife ethylene plant United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €312,098

Between February 2018 and September 2019, five leaks of highly flammable hydrocarbons occurred at the Mossmorran major hazard site (COMAH upper tier), all caused by corrosion under insulation; around 82 tonnes escaped in one leak. During a routine inspection in May 2019, inspectors of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) smelled escaping gas – the company had known about this leak for around four months and had continued production without additional precautions. The inspection arrangements for insulated pipework were inadequate; fine of 267,000 GBP.

What organisations can take from it

Recurring damage patterns must change the inspection concept – visual inspections from the ground are not sufficient for insulated pipework.

Authority / court
Health and Safety Executive (Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, reg. 6(2); Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s. 33(1)(c)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
26 Aug 2026

Original amount 267,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Aug 2026.

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.

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.

11 Aug 2026 Citibank, N.A., London BranchOFSI imposes 4.7 million GBP on Citibank London over Russia payments United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €5.54m

Mainly between February and November 2022, the London branch processed 970 payments totalling around 19.7 million GBP that breached Russia and anti-corruption sanctions. The causes were overloaded alert handling after the wave of designations, delayed escalation and human error; the bank voluntarily disclosed most of the breaches and received a 20% reduction from HM Treasury's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI).

What organisations can take from it

During waves of designations, alert handling needs additional trained capacity – backlogs and wrong decisions in screening are themselves sanctions breaches.

Relevance to training and awareness

Handling sanctions alerts, escalation and freezing

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019; Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regulations 2021; s. 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Predominantly voluntary disclosure and cooperation (20% reduction); exceptional burden caused by the 2022 sanctions packages taken into account
Published
2 Sep 2026

Original amount 4,732,830.58 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Aug 2026.

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.

7 Aug 2026 ACRO Criminal Records OfficeICO: reprimand for ACRO Criminal Records Office after cyber incident United KingdomData breaches and data security Reprimand or warning

The UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) issued a reprimand to ACRO Criminal Records Office. According to the ICO, it followed a cyber incident that may have affected the personal data of around 10,000 people in the UK. The ICO found infringements of the duty to implement appropriate technical and organisational security measures under Article 32 UK GDPR. No fine was imposed.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Art. 32(1), 32(1)(b) und 32(1)(d) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector

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 Aug 2026 Elderly Aids LimitedICO: £190,000 fine for Elderly Aids over unsolicited marketing calls United KingdomMarketing and consent €221,691

The ICO fined Elderly Aids Limited, a seller of call-blocking devices, £190,000 and also issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that the company had made 758,053 unsolicited direct marketing calls to numbers registered with the TPS/CTPS whose subscribers had not agreed to such calls, leading to 20 complaints. The legal basis is regulations 21 and 24 of PECR. Under the notice, payment by 7 September 2026 reduces the amount by 20% to £152,000.

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 (Geldbuße), section 40 DPA 1998 (Anordnung)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce

Original amount 190,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 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.

30 Jul 2026 Airbus Operations LimitedAirbus Operations pays 6.4 million GBP for export control breaches in technology transfer United KingdomExport control and dual-use goods €7.48m

Over an extended period before November 2022, Airbus Operations Ltd breached the Export Control Order 2008: transfers of controlled technology under three open general export licences (OGEL) were not correctly documented, required registers were missing, and one individual licence was not complied with. The case came to light through voluntary disclosure and was concluded by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) by way of a compound settlement (date of publication).

What organisations can take from it

Technology transfers by e-mail or data room are also exports – conditions, registers and records of general licences must be put into practice day to day.

Relevance to training and awareness

Licence conditions and record-keeping obligations in technology transfer

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) / Export Control Joint Unit
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Export Control Order 2008, Art. 29(2) und 29(3) (Auflagen und Register bei OGELs) sowie Auflage einer SIEL; Straftaten nach Art. 38(1)(a) und (b); Compound Settlement durch HMRC
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary disclosure, full cooperation, remedial measures
Published
30 Jul 2026

Original amount 6,409,388 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Jul 2026.

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.

27 Jul 2026 Equity for Growth (Securities) Limited (in liquidation)FCA: Public censure for Equity for Growth (Securities) over misleading minibond promotions United KingdomMisleading advertising and pricing 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

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.

27 Jul 2026 Metropolitan Police ServiceICO: order and reprimand against London's Met Police after disclosure of sensitive data United KingdomData breaches and data security Order

The Metropolitan Police handed a defendant unredacted documents containing the new address and telephone number of a stalking victim, and in a circular e-mail disclosed 18 people with a parliamentary connection in an open recipient list. The UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) ordered improvements within 3 and 12 months, including in data protection training completion rates.

What organisations can take from it

Policies are not enough if mandatory training goes uncompleted for years – monitor and enforce training completion rates.

Relevance to training and awareness

Redacting documents, e-mail distribution lists (BCC), data protection training

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Data Protection Act 2018, Section 40
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
10,000 or more
Culpability
negligent
Published
5 Aug 2026

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.

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.

21 Jul 2026 Dragon Alfa Cement LimitedCement plant with 12 employees: 1 million GBP after fatal accident at unguarded machinery United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €1.17m

In 2021 a 35-year-old employee was crushed by a 1.6-tonne concrete weight at the cement bagging plant in Sharpness. A large section of the perimeter fencing had routinely been removed over a prolonged period, leaving dangerous moving parts freely accessible. The company – with 12 employees according to its 2024 annual accounts – was fined 1 million GBP plus 9,621 GBP in costs.

What organisations can take from it

Treat removed guard fencing as a management failure and stop it – tolerating permanently open danger zones can lead to fines in the millions, even for a small business.

Authority / court
Bristol 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
Construction and real estate
Employees
Under 50
Published
21 Jul 2026

Original amount 1,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 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.

17 Jul 2026 Southern WaterSouthern Water: £7.1m fine for repeated sewage discharges in Kent United KingdomEmissions and permits €8.38m

Canterbury Crown Court fined Southern Water £7,127,083 for 13 breaches of the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2016, plus £149,000 in prosecution costs and a £181 victim surcharge. Between 2019 and 2021, failed pumps and poorly maintained equipment at the Margate and Broadstairs pumping stations led to several discharges of untreated sewage into the sea, some of which were reported only the next day or weeks later; beaches had to be closed. The company also admitted 35 further unlawful discharges from the same period.

What organisations can take from it

Maintaining critical pumping equipment and reporting every discharge to the regulator immediately are core duties of any permit holder.

Relevance to training and awareness

Plant maintenance and prompt reporting of environmental incidents

Authority / court
Canterbury Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Reg. 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Repeat case
yes
Published
17 Jul 2026

Original amount 7,127,083 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 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.

17 Jul 2026 Puratos LimitedPuratos: 120,000 GBP for flour dust above exposure limits and heavy sack handling United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €141,014

During an inspection in December 2024, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found dust escaping from machinery, blowing down with compressed air and dry sweeping at the bakery ingredients factory; measurements confirmed that workplace exposure limits had been exceeded, with a risk of asthma. In addition, employees lifted 25 kg sacks by hand every day. The site had already been cited in 2021 for the same deficiencies; fine of 120,000 GBP plus 6,270 GBP in costs. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2024, the company had around 116 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Companies that do not permanently remedy deficiencies after a citation pay significantly more the next time – flour dust is a recognised cause of asthma.

Relevance to training and awareness

Dust exposure and lifting heavy loads

Authority / court
Health and Safety Executive (Milton Keynes Magistrates' Court)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s. 2(1)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Food and agriculture
Employees
50 to 249
Repeat case
yes
Published
20 Jul 2026

Original amount 120,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Jul 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.

16 Jul 2026 HDI Global SEPRA: £4.165m fine on HDI Global SE for inaccurate data on the FSCS compensation scheme United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €4.91m

The PRA fined HDI Global SE, an insurer headquartered in Hanover that operates in the UK through a branch, 4,165,000 GBP. Between August 2021 and August 2024 the firm repeatedly submitted incorrect data on liabilities protected by the FSCS and on the FSCS levy tariff, including in supposedly corrected submissions; it lacked written procedures, clear accountability and internal oversight, and before summer 2023 it did not consult the PRA's rules and guidance.

What organisations can take from it

Returns used to calculate levies need documented calculation procedures and independent review – especially where corrections are submitted.

Authority / court
Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
PRA Fundamental Rules 2 und 6; s. 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Detailed account under the Early Account Scheme, settlement with a 30% discount (otherwise 5,950,000 GBP), corrected historical data and additional FSCS levies paid; in the PRA's view the breaches were neither deliberate nor reckless.
Published
20 Jul 2026

Original amount 4,165,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 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.

16 Jul 2026 Royal Mail Group LtdTribunal: Royal Mail subjected whistleblower to detriment – £6,978 compensation United KingdomRetaliation against whistleblowers €8,222

The Employment Tribunal in Manchester found that the claimant had been subjected to detriment because of a protected disclosure and awarded her the agreed amount of £6,978.20. The claims for disability discrimination and constructive dismissal were dismissed.

What organisations can take from it

Large organisations, too, must ensure that whistleblowers do not suffer disadvantages in their day-to-day work.

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)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
7 Sep 2026

Original amount 6,978.2 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 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.

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.

6 Jul 2026 Emma Bridgewater LimitedEmma Bridgewater: snow machine falls during Christmas lights event – 266,666 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €311,752

During a Christmas lights event at the factory shop in Hanley in November 2024, an unsecured artificial snow machine fell from a window; shards of glass injured a twelve-year-old girl on the head. The ceramics manufacturer had not assessed the risks and, contrary to the manufacturer's instructions, had not secured the machine; fine of 266,666 GBP plus 4,931 GBP in costs. According to its annual accounts (financial year to April 2025), the company had an average of 345 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Treat marketing events as a health and safety matter: when installing equipment above the public, prevent objects from falling and follow the manufacturer's instructions.

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
Regulation 10(1) Work at Height Regulations 2005; Section 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
250 to 999
Published
7 Jul 2026

Original amount 266,666 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 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.

3 Jul 2026 TMA Haulage LtdTMA Haulage: operator licence curtailed from five to four vehicles, revocation from 6 October 2026 United KingdomWorking time Other

Following an investigation by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), the Traffic Commissioner (regulator of commercial vehicle operators) found that the sole director of TMA Haulage Ltd had driven using the driver card of a former employee, thereby falsifying the records, three times in June and July 2025 and – after being interviewed by the DVSA – twice in April 2026; on one of those days he continued driving in this way without taking the break that was due. The operator's licence was curtailed immediately from five to four vehicles and revoked with effect from 6 October 2026. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

What organisations can take from it

Driver cards are strictly personal – regularly comparing vehicle unit data with the cards of the drivers deployed uncovers misuse before the authority does.

Relevance to training and awareness

Drivers' hours and misuse of driver cards

Authority / court
Traffic Commissioner (Western Traffic Area); Ermittlung: Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Working time
Legal basis
Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995, ss. 26(1)(f), 27(1)(a) und (b); Road Traffic Act 1988, ss. 115, 117; Tachografen- und Lenkzeitvorschriften
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
According to the decision, points in the company's favour were: most compliance systems in place, drivers properly employed, an MOT pass rate in line with the national average, and the re-engagement of a consultant and legal representation.
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not set out here.
Published
22 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.

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.

30 Jun 2026 Curtis Faraday LimitedFCA bars debt adviser Curtis Faraday from taking new customers over consumer risks United KingdomOrganisational requirements Order

The FCA barred the debt advice firm Curtis Faraday Limited with immediate effect from accepting new customers or referrals for debt, insolvency and IVA-related activities and required it to refer existing customers to other advice providers. Based on file reviews and call recordings, the FCA saw indications that customers' financial information was distorted during the advice process, that the business model, with close links to insolvency service providers, created conflicts of interest and a bias towards commission-generating solutions, that staff circumvented controls and that the firm repeatedly gave the FCA incomplete or inconsistent information.

What organisations can take from it

Debt advice must be impartial: commission incentives and close links to debt solution providers require effective controls against product bias.

Relevance to training and awareness

Impartial advice and handling conflicts of interest

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
s. 55L(3)(a) FSMA 2000; Threshold Conditions nach Schedule 6 FSMA (paras. 2C, 2D, 2E und 2F)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance

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.

29 Jun 2026 Petrofac Facilities Management LimitedPetrofac Facilities Management: £569,157 settlement over Russia sanctions breaches United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €660,160

The company paid HMRC a compound settlement of £569,157.07 for alleged breaches of the Russia sanctions. According to HMRC, while withdrawing from Russia in 2022/2023 it allegedly made sanctioned industrial goods available on two occasions to a person connected with Russia or for use in Russia, and provided related technical assistance. According to HMRC, this is the first time it has publicly named the company behind such a settlement.

What organisations can take from it

Even when withdrawing from a sanctioned market, the prohibitions on making goods available and on technical assistance apply in full.

Relevance to training and awareness

Sanctions screening of goods supplied and technical assistance when exiting a market

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Reg. 46Y(2)(c) und Reg. 46Z(1)(b) Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary disclosure and full cooperation with HMRC.
Published
29 Jun 2026

Original amount 569,157.07 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 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.

23 Jun 2026 TICKETBIS S.L. (StubHub UK)StubHub UK: 889,200 GBP penalty over mandatory fees added later United KingdomMisleading advertising and pricing €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.

What organisations can take from it

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.

Sources

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.

19 Jun 2026 CACEIS Bank (UK Branch)FCA: public censure for CACEIS UK over deficient checks on a custody client United KingdomCustomer due diligence Reprimand or warning

The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) issued a public censure because the London branch opened and operated accounts for the wealth manager WealthTek, although its own register searches showed that it lacked permissions to hold client assets, and overlooked a restriction noted in the register; 16 monitoring alerts were not worked through over two years, and more than £314 million flowed through the accounts. In view of cooperation and a voluntary payment of £31.7 million to WealthTek clients, the FCA refrained from imposing a fine (otherwise £23.1 million after discount).

What organisations can take from it

Anyone who notices a discrepancy in the register must clarify and document it before accounts are activated.

Relevance to training and awareness

Register checks and follow-up on identified KYC gaps

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
Section 205 FSMA (Public Censure) wegen Verstoßes gegen FCA Principle 2; Maßstab u. a. SYSC 6.1.1R, 6.3.1R, 6.3.3R und Regulations 18, 27, 28 MLR 2017
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
Cooperation, acknowledgement of the deficiencies and a voluntary payment of £31,714,068 to those harmed
Published
25 Jun 2026
Sources

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.

16 Jun 2026 SCS Railways (Joint Venture von Skanska Construction UK Limited, Costain Limited und Strabag AG)HS2 joint venture SCS Railways: £400,000 fine after tipper truck fall United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €462,583

SCS Railways, a joint venture of Skanska, Costain and Strabag on the HS2 rail project, was fined £400,000 and ordered to pay £8,974 in costs. On 27 July 2021 at the Copthall North site near Uxbridge, a 20-tonne tipper truck belonging to a contracted haulage company fell from an excavation ramp and the driver was injured. The Health and Safety Executive found neither signage nor edge protection on the vehicle routes; a traffic route changed on the morning of the incident had left an unprotected edge and had been neither properly planned nor communicated in time.

What organisations can take from it

Every short-notice change to site vehicle routes needs a risk check and immediate briefing of all drivers.

Relevance to training and awareness

Traffic routes and change management on major construction sites

Authority / court
Uxbridge Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea.
Published
26 Jun 2026

Original amount 400,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 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.

16 Jun 2026 Samson Containers LtdContainer manufacturer ignores notices on welding fume and hearing protection – £30,000 United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €34,694

Despite improvement notices from September 2024 and February 2025, the manufacturer of skips and metal containers failed to implement any measures against carcinogenic welding fume (mild steel) – with neither extraction nor respiratory protection; in addition, there was no health surveillance for hearing for employees exposed to noise. Fine of £30,000 plus costs. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2024, the company had around 17 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Regulatory orders on hazardous substances have deadlines – companies that let them lapse will be prosecuted regardless of whether an accident occurs.

Authority / court
Warrington Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 33(1)(g) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (Nichtbefolgung von Improvement Notices)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Steel and metals
Employees
Under 50
Repeat case
yes
Published
18 Jun 2026

Original amount 30,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Jun 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.

15 Jun 2026 Marks Electrical LimitedCMA: GBP 720,000 fine for Marks Electrical over pre-selected extra services United KingdomInformation duties in online retail €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).

What organisations can take from it

Paid add-ons must never be pre-selected in an online shop – since the DMCCA, the CMA can impose fines and order refunds itself.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

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 Jun 2026 Esso Petroleum Company LimitedEsso: £1m fine after LPG release at Fawley refinery United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €1.16m

Esso was fined £1m and ordered to pay £12,277 in costs. On 8 November 2022, a corroded steel tower at the Fawley refinery partially collapsed, damaged pipework and released around 2,400 kg of liquefied petroleum gas over 33 hours; workers were exposed to the risk of falling debris and potential burns. According to the Health and Safety Executive's investigation, the corrosion had been known since 2010 without appropriate action being taken.

What organisations can take from it

Known corrosion findings on load-bearing structures must be assessed and remedied promptly, before they lead to a major incident.

Relevance to training and awareness

Asset integrity and handling known corrosion findings

Authority / court
Southampton Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea; no injuries.
Published
15 Jun 2026

Original amount 1,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 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 OVO Energy LimitedOfgem: OVO pays GBP 10.4m over poor support for vulnerable prepayment customers United KingdomConsumer protection and online retail €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.

What organisations can take from it

Policies on paper are not enough: training materials and processes for vulnerable customers must be consistent and checked in practice.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

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.

2 Jun 2026 Euro Exchange Securities UK LtdFCA halts e-money institution Euro Exchange Securities UK over money laundering risks United KingdomInternal controls Order

The FCA barred the e-money institution Euro Exchange Securities UK Ltd with immediate effect from providing any e-money and payment services, prohibited any dealing with customer funds without its consent and required an independent third party to oversee their return. According to the FCA, the reasons were systemic weaknesses in combating financial crime – in customer risk assessment, customer due diligence and enhanced due diligence, screening, transaction monitoring and governance – together with indications that the obligations to safeguard customer funds were not being met. On the FCA's application the court appointed interim managers on 4 June 2026 and confirmed the special administration on 11 June 2026.

What organisations can take from it

Payment institutions must be able to evidence customer due diligence, transaction monitoring and the segregation of customer funds at all times, or face immediate shutdown.

Relevance to training and awareness

Anti-money laundering and safeguarding of customer funds at payment service providers

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
reg. 11(1) Electronic Money Regulations 2011 i. V. m. regs. 6(5)(b), 6(5)(c), 6(6)(d), 20 und 37 EMRs; Money Laundering Regulations 2017
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Published
5 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.

28 May 2026 Thermotech Wall and Loft Surveys LtdICO: £240,000 fine for Thermotech over marketing calls to TPS numbers United KingdomMarketing and consent €276,928

The ICO fined Thermotech Wall and Loft Surveys Ltd £240,000 and issued an enforcement notice. After executing a search warrant in April 2025, the regulator found that between October 2024 and March 2025 the company had instigated 575,062 unsolicited marketing calls to numbers that had been on the TPS register for more than 28 days. There were 132 complaints. 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 und 24 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate

Original amount 240,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 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.

27 May 2026 Scottish Sea Farms LimitedScottish Sea Farms: £70,000 civil penalties over missing F-gas leak detection United KingdomEmissions and permits €80,815

Scotland's environmental regulator SEPA imposed two civil penalties of £35,000 each (£70,000 in total) on salmon processor Scottish Sea Farms. Two ice plants at the Gremista site in Lerwick (Shetland) contained fluorinated greenhouse gases above the threshold of 500 tonnes of CO2 equivalent but had no working leak detection system.

What organisations can take from it

Large refrigeration systems need working leak detection; its absence is penalised even without a proven leak.

Relevance to training and awareness

Obligations for refrigeration equipment containing fluorinated gases

Authority / court
Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases Regulations 2015; Verordnung (EU) Nr. 517/2014
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Mitigating circumstances
The company has since brought the equipment into compliance.
Published
27 May 2026

Original amount 70,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 May 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.

26 May 2026 Sabre Global Technologies LimitedSabre subsidiary accepted payments from designated Ural Airlines United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €1.16m

The provider of a travel booking system continued to provide services to Ural Airlines, designated in May 2022, requested payments of around 906,600 USD and, after the funds were frozen by the bank, looked for alternative payment routes, which HM Treasury's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) regarded as circumvention. A lack of escalation during a change of roles, vacant leadership positions in legal and compliance, policies focused on US law and screening that did not flag the designation all contributed. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2024, the company had around 150 employees.

What organisations can take from it

If an existing customer is designated, escalate this immediately; looking for alternative payment routes after the bank has frozen funds is itself a breach.

Relevance to training and awareness

Responding to new designations of existing customers, prohibition of circumvention

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, regs. 13, 14, 19
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Employees
50 to 249
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary disclosure (31 October 2022) and full cooperation; settlement under the new settlement procedure
Published
17 Jun 2026

Original amount 1,000,920.59 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 May 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.

22 May 2026 Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy LtdSiemens Gamesa: £600,000 fine after accident at Hull blade factory United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €694,300

Siemens Gamesa was fined £600,000 and ordered to pay £7,980.80 in costs. At the blade factory in Hull on 18 July 2024, a prefabricated component weighing around 800 kg fell onto an employee after support poles had been removed; she has since been paralysed from the waist down. The Health and Safety Executive found inadequate risk assessment, no safe system of work and insufficient training.

What organisations can take from it

Where employees develop their own working methods, a binding and trained safe system of work is usually missing.

Relevance to training and awareness

Risk assessment and safe systems of work in manufacturing

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Grimsby 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
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea; after the accident the supports were secured with a key-controlled system.
Published
26 May 2026

Original amount 600,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 May 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.

22 May 2026 Streamline Shipping Agencies LimitedAberdeen port agency: £146,700 after forklift accident without traffic separation United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €169,756

At the Port of Aberdeen, an employee loosening a lorry curtain was struck by a reversing forklift truck and suffered multiple fractures and a degloving injury. Pedestrians and vehicles were not separated during simultaneous loading and unloading. Fine of £146,700. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 236 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Loading and manoeuvring areas need firm rules on who may be where and when if forklifts and pedestrians are working at the same time.

Authority / court
Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Ermittlung: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Regulation 17(1) Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992; Section 33(1)(c) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping
Employees
50 to 249
Published
28 May 2026

Original amount 146,700 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 May 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.

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 United KingdomMisleading advertising and pricing 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.

What organisations can take from it

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.

Relevance to training and awareness

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

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 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.

19 May 2026 Jusan Technologies LtdTribunal: Jusan Technologies withheld 600,000 US dollars after an employee raised concerns United KingdomRetaliation against whistleblowers Other

In August 2023, an employee raised internal concerns about possible irregularities in the use of earmarked funds. The London South Employment Tribunal found that, for that reason, a payment of 600,000 US dollars owed to him at the end of his contract had been withheld (whistleblowing detriment, s. 47B ERA 1996); compensation will be determined separately. It is not known whether the decision is final.

What organisations can take from it

Subjecting whistleblowers to detriment, for example by withholding contractual payments, exposes employers in the UK to compensation claims; under s. 47B(1A) ERA 1996, individual workers can also be personally liable.

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, 43C, 43G, 47B(1) und (1A)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
unknown
Employees
Under 50
Published
10 Jul 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.

7 May 2026 South Staffordshire Plc und South Staffordshire Water PlcICO: almost £1 million against water supplier South Staffordshire after cyber attack United KingdomData breaches and data security €1.12m

In 2020, malware entered the water supplier's network via a phishing e-mail and remained undetected for around 20 months; in 2022, attackers obtained administrator rights and stole data on 633,887 people, which ended up on the dark web. The UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) criticised, among other things, monitoring of only 5% of the IT environment, outdated software such as Windows Server 2003 and a lack of vulnerability and patch management.

What organisations can take from it

Utilities in critical infrastructure must also monitor their entire IT estate and replace legacy systems – an attack must not only come to light through performance problems.

Relevance to training and awareness

Recognising phishing

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 Abs. 1
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
40% reduction for early admission of liability; payment agreed without appeal.
Published
11 May 2026

Original amount 963,900 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 May 2026.

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.

7 May 2026 Duncan Farms LimitedDuncan Farms: 53,000 GBP because a worker was caught in an unguarded conveyor United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €61,335

In October 2024, an employee of the egg producer climbed between two running manure conveyors to check a noise and was caught at the in-running nip; he suffered nerve damage to both arms. The drive had no fixed or interlocked guards – instruction and clothing rules alone were not sufficient. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecution resulted in a fine of 53,000 GBP.

What organisations can take from it

Instruction is no substitute for technical safeguards: in-running nips must be protected by fixed or interlocked guards.

Relevance to training and awareness

Stopping machinery before intervening

Authority / court
Health and Safety Executive (Aberdeen Sheriff Court)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, reg. 11(1) und (2); Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s. 33(1)(c)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
13 May 2026

Original amount 53,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 May 2026.

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.

1 May 2026 Ultra Electronics Holdings Limited (vormals plc)Ultra Electronics: DPA of around 10.1 million GBP over bribery in Algeria and Oman United KingdomBribery of public officials €11.6m

The British defence supplier failed to prevent bribery by agents in connection with three public contracts in Oman and Algeria (including a contract with the Omani Ministry of Transport worth up to 200 million GBP). The DPA approved by Southwark Crown Court provides for a penalty of 10,083,150 GBP; in addition, the company is bearing around 4.8 million GBP of the SFO's investigation costs and must report on its compliance programme for three years.

What organisations can take from it

Companies that use agents for government contracts must be able to demonstrate adequate procedures – otherwise the company is liable under Section 7 Bribery Act even without any intent to bribe on its own part.

Relevance to training and awareness

Use of sales agents in public contracts

Authority / court
Serious Fraud Office (SFO)
Area of law
Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials
Legal basis
Section 7 Bribery Act 2010 (Failure to prevent bribery); Deferred Prosecution Agreement
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Defence and security
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Self-report of the Algerian matters in 2018; restructuring of ownership and leadership; 45 % discount on the penalty.
Published
1 May 2026

Original amount 10,083,150 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Apr 2026.

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.

30 Apr 2026 Cardiff UniversityCardiff University: £280,000 fine over occupational asthma from animal allergens United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €323,232

Cardiff University was fined £280,000 and ordered to pay £11,745 in costs after two employees developed occupational asthma from exposure to animal allergens. According to the Health and Safety Executive, the university failed from 2008 to 2025 to identify and implement suitable controls against allergen exposure, although the COSHH regulations and relevant guidance had long been in place.

What organisations can take from it

Slowly developing occupational diseases also lead to prosecution when exposures go uncontrolled for years.

Relevance to training and awareness

Health protection in laboratories working with animals

Authority / court
Cardiff 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
Public sector
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea.
Published
1 May 2026

Original amount 280,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Apr 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.

30 Apr 2026 Deutsche Bank AG London BranchOFSI: GBP 165,000 settlement penalty for Deutsche Bank AG London Branch over payments to an app developer United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €190,476

On 30 April 2026 OFSI imposed a monetary penalty of GBP 165,000 on the London branch of Deutsche Bank AG by way of settlement. According to OFSI's findings, in June and July 2022 the branch processed two payments totalling GBP 635,618.75 for a customer to a Russian app developer owned by a designated entity. According to OFSI, its screening provider's list did not contain ownership information on the designated entity, so the beneficiary was not identified. The bank had voluntarily disclosed the payments on 20 September 2022. After a notice of intent of 12 September 2025, which OFSI upheld on 2 December 2025, the bank requested a ministerial review on 23 January 2026; the proceedings ended in settlement. The publication does not state the amount originally proposed. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Imposition of Monetary Penalty – Deutsche Bank AG London Branch (“DBLB”)", 19 May 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/imposition-of-monetary-penalty-deutsche-bank-ag-london-branch-dblb. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, reg. 12; Geldbuße nach s. 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Published
19 May 2026

Original amount 165,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 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.

21 Apr 2026 Industrial Chemicals LimitedIndustrial Chemicals: 3.8 million GBP after caustic soda burns – one leg amputated United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €4.37m

In 2019, an employee stepped into a puddle of caustic soda; his safety boots offered no protection, and his leg had to be amputated below the knee. In 2022, another worker suffered chemical burns during manual decanting. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found leaking pipes and valves, a lack of maintenance, no risk assessment for decanting and untested safety footwear; fine of 3.8 million GBP plus 124,748 GBP in costs. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2024, the company had around 469 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Leaks of hazardous substances are not a normal state of affairs – maintenance, spill management and tested protective equipment go hand in hand.

Relevance to training and awareness

Handling corrosive hazardous substances and PPE

Authority / court
Health and Safety Executive (Southwark Crown Court)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002, reg. 7(1)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
250 to 999
Published
24 Apr 2026

Original amount 3,800,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 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.

21 Apr 2026 Unternehmen (Anrufe zur Schadensregulierung), UK (anonymisiert)ICO: enforcement notice against a UK company over claims management calls without consent United KingdomMarketing and consent Order

The ICO issued an enforcement notice to a UK company. The ICO found that the company had instigated calls about claims management services without the consent of the people called. Under regulation 21A of PECR such calls are only permitted with prior consent; the ICO also found a breach of regulation 24. The notice is an enforcement notice and does not impose a fine.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulations 21A und 24 PECR; section 40 DPA 1998
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance

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 Apr 2026 Sapia Partners LLPFCA: Public censure for Sapia Partners over lack of segregation for client money United KingdomOrganisational requirements Reprimand or warning

The FCA publicly censured Sapia Partners LLP. Sapia was responsible for client money accounts operated in connection with its appointed representative, a wealth manager, but the FCA found that from 2014 to 2020 it did not ensure effective segregation between those making payments and those reconciling the accounts. About £150 million was deposited into the accounts in that period, exposing clients to a risk of loss. Sapia agreed to a voluntary payment of £19,637,950 to that representative's clients; for this reason the FCA did not impose a fine, which it said would otherwise have been £7,412,000 (after discount).

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
FCA Principle 10; CASS 7.12.2R bzw. CASS 7.3.2R; section 205 FSMA 2000
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

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.

10 Apr 2026 MM Flowers LimitedFlower supplier: leg amputated after roller deck accident – 134,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €153,837

While unloading stuck air cargo skids ahead of Valentine's Day 2023, an employee's leg became trapped in a 10 cm gap in the roller deck and was struck by a skid that slid forward; the leg had to be amputated. Employees had to free stuck loads by hand, and the gap had never been identified; fine of 134,000 GBP plus 4,908 GBP in costs. According to its annual accounts (financial year to August 2025), the flower supplier had an average of 882 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Include everyday tasks such as freeing stuck loads in the risk assessment – especially for peak periods.

Authority / court
Peterborough 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
Food and agriculture
Employees
250 to 999
Published
13 Apr 2026

Original amount 134,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Apr 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 Mar 2026 Energy Prices Direct LimitedICO: £160,000 fine for Energy Prices Direct over calls without TPS screening United KingdomMarketing and consent €184,325

The ICO fined Energy Prices Direct Limited, an energy switching broker, £160,000. The ICO found that the company had obtained contact details from public sources and list providers and did not screen them against the TPS/CTPS registers before making marketing calls. The legal basis is regulations 21 and 24 of PECR. Under the notice, timely payment reduces the amount by 20% to £128,000.

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
Energy and utilities

Original amount 160,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 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.

27 Mar 2026 Dinosaur Merchant Bank LimitedDinosaur Merchant Bank: 338,000 GBP – CFD trading without market abuse surveillance United KingdomOrganisational requirements €389,760

After a new order management system was introduced in June 2024, CFD transactions with an underlying value of around 3.05 billion USD were not captured by automated trade surveillance. The bank identified the error in October 2024 but only remedied it in May 2025; the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed 338,000 GBP after a 30% cooperation discount.

What organisations can take from it

With every system migration, check whether surveillance systems actually capture the new data flows.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
Art. 16 Abs. 2 UK MAR; SYSC 6.1.1R; FCA Principle 3
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
Full cooperation (30% discount); CFD business discontinued in May 2025.

Original amount 338,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Mar 2026.

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.

26 Mar 2026 Huws Gray LimitedBuilders' merchant Huws Gray: 2.2 million GBP after fatal conveyor accident United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €2.54m

At Herringswell sawmill in 2024 a labourer was crushed by a pack of timber weighing around three tonnes after a colleague started the conveyor without seeing him inside the conveyor framework. The company knew that workers were entering the danger zone – CCTV showed 19 occasions between 14 April and 23 May 2024 – but only put up stickers; fine of 2.2 million GBP plus 9,929 GBP in costs. According to its 2025 annual accounts, the company had an average of 4,570 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Where you know of unsafe behaviour at machinery, prevent it by technical means – warning signs alone will not satisfy a court.

Authority / court
Chelmsford 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
Retail and e-commerce
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Published
27 Mar 2026

Original amount 2,200,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 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.

26 Mar 2026 Commercial Lines Limited (HLN Supplies)Plastics fabricator: two finger injuries in ten days – 16,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €18,494

In August 2024 two employees of the Leeds plastics fabricator lost parts of fingers within ten days – one on an unguarded sanding machine, the other on a table saw. The HSE (Health and Safety Executive, Britain's workplace safety regulator) found inadequate guarding, insufficient saw training, no safe systems of work and no suitable risk assessment; fine of 16,000 GBP plus 6,534 GBP in costs for the business, which had 17 employees according to its annual accounts.

What organisations can take from it

Treat an accident on one machine as a warning for all others – after the first incident, review all guarding and instruction immediately.

Relevance to training and awareness

Safe use of saws and machinery

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

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
Section 2(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974; Regulation 3(1) Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
Under 50
Published
26 Mar 2026

Original amount 16,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 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.

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.

23 Mar 2026 The Bank of London Group Limited und Oplyse Holdings Limited (vormals The Bank of London Group Holdings Limited)PRA: £2m fine on The Bank of London and its parent for misleading it about capital United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €2.31m

The PRA fined The Bank of London Group Limited and its financial holding company Oplyse Holdings Limited 2,000,000 GBP. Between October 2021 and May 2024 they failed to meet their capital requirements for an extended period, repeatedly misled the PRA about their actual capital position – including with fabricated documents – and did not properly manage or report a large exposure arising from a loan by the bank to its parent. It was the PRA's first fine for a lack of integrity and its first action against a financial holding company; a penalty of 12 million GBP would have been appropriate.

What organisations can take from it

Only the true capital position counts with the regulator – embellished or fabricated evidence turns a capital problem into an integrity breach.

Relevance to training and awareness

Truthfulness towards the regulator; no embellished capital evidence

Authority / court
Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
PRA Fundamental Rules 1, 3, 4 und 7; PRA Rulebook: Reporting (CRR) Part Kap. 3 Art. 5 und Art. 7, Large Exposures (CRR) Part Art. 393–395, Notifications 2.3, Related Party Transaction Risk 2.1 und 2.3, Definition of Capital 7A; ss. 206 und 192Y FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Because serious financial hardship was demonstrated, the PRA reduced the penalty from 12 million GBP to 2 million GBP; the firms settled with the PRA.
Published
24 Mar 2026

Original amount 2,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 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.

20 Mar 2026 Conclusive Financial Limited (auch „PCP Refunds“)FCA orders Conclusive to remove misleading adverts for motor finance claims United KingdomMisleading advertising and pricing 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.

What organisations can take from it

Financial promotions must not borrow trust from celebrities or regulators' logos, nor promise unsubstantiated average amounts.

Relevance to training and awareness

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

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.

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.

19 Mar 2026 Apple Distribution International LimitedOFSI: GBP 390,000 settlement penalty for Apple Distribution International over payments to an app developer United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €451,452

On 19 March 2026 OFSI imposed a monetary penalty of GBP 390,000 on Ireland-based Apple Distribution International Limited by way of settlement. According to OFSI's findings, the company, which pays out revenues to software developers on an app marketplace, instructed two payments totalling GBP 635,618.75 in June and July 2022 from a UK bank account to a Russian app developer owned by a designated entity, and did not cancel the instructions. OFSI identified reliance on developers' self-declarations and on third-party data, among other things, as causes. The company had voluntarily disclosed the payments on 4 October 2022. The settlement followed a notice of intent of 11 November 2025 and was reached under the settlement process introduced in February 2026; OFSI made no findings against the parent company. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Imposition of monetary penalty: Apple Distribution International Limited", 30 March 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/imposition-of-monetary-penalty-apple-distribution-international-limited. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, reg. 12; Geldbuße nach s. 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017 (Settlement)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Published
30 Mar 2026

Original amount 390,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Mar 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.

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.

11 Mar 2026 National Grid Electricity Transmission plcNational Grid (NGET): 20 million GBP after neglected Harker substation United KingdomOther €23.2m

Between 2016 and 2021, the transmission system operator did not adequately monitor, maintain and repair the civil structures of the 132 kV Harker substation near Carlisle – a hub for electricity exchange between Scotland and England – and thereby also delayed grid connections. NGET accepted the breaches and paid 20 million GBP into the Energy Industry Voluntary Redress Scheme.

What organisations can take from it

Operators of critical networks must systematically inspect even the inconspicuous civil structures of their installations – a maintenance backlog becomes a threat to supply.

Authority / court
Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
Area of law
Other
Legal basis
Electricity Act 1989, s. 9(2); Standard Licence Condition B7 (Transmission Licence)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities

Original amount 20,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Mar 2026.

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.

10 Mar 2026 U K Insurance LimitedPRA: £10.625m fine on U K Insurance for an incorrect Solvency II balance sheet United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €12.3m

The PRA fined U K Insurance Limited, the principal insurance company of the Direct Line Group (part of Aviva since July 2025), 10,625,000 GBP. Because of ineffective controls and staffing and capability issues in its finance and actuarial functions, its Solvency II balance sheet was miscalculated in 2023 and 2024, so that the firm overstated its solvency to the PRA and the market; the error went undetected for a considerable time. It was the first case under the PRA's Early Account Scheme.

What organisations can take from it

Regulatory metrics such as the solvency ratio need effective preventive and detective controls and sufficiently qualified staff.

Relevance to training and awareness

Controls, capability and training in finance and actuarial functions

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
PRA Fundamental Rule 6; Notifications 6.1; Reporting 2.4 und 3.2 (PRA Rulebook); s. 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Participation in the Early Account Scheme with early admissions: 50% discount (otherwise 21.25 million GBP); after discovery management notified the PRA without delay, corrected the published figures and remedied the causes; in the PRA's view the breaches were neither deliberate nor reckless.
Published
11 Mar 2026

Original amount 10,625,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 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.

3 Mar 2026 John Wood Group PLCJohn Wood Group: incorrect financial results published – almost 13 million GBP United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €14.9m

The energy services company published incorrect results for the 2022 and 2023 financial years and for the first half of 2024; accounting judgements were influenced by the desire to maintain previously reported figures, and systems and controls were inadequate. The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed a fine of 12,993,700 GBP (18,562,500 GBP without the 30 % discount).

What organisations can take from it

Accounting judgements must not be geared to figures already communicated – this is a control failure, not a calculation error.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
Listing Rule 1.3.3R; Listing Principle 1
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
30 % discount for early settlement and acceptance of the findings
Published
4 Mar 2026

Original amount 12,993,700 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Mar 2026.

Sources

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.

23 Feb 2026 Reddit, Inc.ICO: £14.47 million fine for Reddit over processing children's data without age checks United KingdomData protection €16.6m

The ICO fined Reddit, Inc. £14,472,500. The regulator found that the platform did not use any robust age assurance and therefore had no lawful basis for processing the personal data of children under 13. The ICO also found that Reddit had not carried out a data protection impact assessment on the risks to children before January 2025. The ICO found infringements of Articles 5(1)(a), 6, 8 and 35 UK GDPR.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(a), 6, 8 und 35 UK GDPR; section 155 DPA 2018
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms

Original amount 14,472,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 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.

23 Feb 2026 Yorkshire Water Services LimitedYorkshire Water: 733,333 GBP fine for repeated sewage discharges into park brook United KingdomEmissions and permits €839,630

Between October 2018 and August 2019, untreated sewage entered a brook in Pools Brook Country Park on three occasions – due to a burst rising main, a blockage caused by wet wipes and a failing pipe coupling; during the first incident, fish died in the park lake. Yorkshire Water had already pleaded guilty in January 2024 and had not attended any of the interviews; the court imposed a fine of 733,333 GBP plus costs. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2026, the company had around 4,481 employees.

What organisations can take from it

After a first incident, the cause at the site must be remedied permanently; repeated discharges from the same pipe lead to high fines.

Authority / court
Derby Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulations 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Culpability
negligent
Repeat case
yes
Published
23 Feb 2026

Original amount 733,333 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Feb 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.

20 Feb 2026 The Commissioner of Police for the City of London (City of London Police)ICO: reprimand for City of London Police over late subject access responses United KingdomData subject rights and transparency Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to the City of London Police. The ICO found that between 1 April 2023 and 31 July 2025 the police force had failed to answer subject access requests within the statutory deadline. The ICO found this breached Article 12(3) UK GDPR and section 45(3) of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3) UK GDPR; section 45(3) DPA 2018; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector

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.

18 Feb 2026 Somers Forge LimitedSomers Forge: 750,000 GBP after fatal accident on a 20-metre lathe United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €859,697

In December 2023, a machinist was caught by a lathe and fatally injured while finishing a rotating workpiece with emery cloth. The forge had not prohibited manual work with emery cloth, had not prevented access to moving parts and had not carried out a risk assessment; the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecution resulted in a fine of 750,000 GBP plus 38,314 GBP in costs. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 136 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Expressly prohibit dangerous habitual practices on machine tools and safeguard against them with guarding and instruction.

Relevance to training and awareness

Safe working on rotating machinery

Authority / court
Health and Safety Executive (Walsall Magistrates' Court)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s. 2(1)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Steel and metals
Employees
50 to 249
Published
18 Feb 2026

Original amount 750,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Feb 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.

16 Feb 2026 Carillion plc (in liquidation)FCA: Public censure for Carillion plc over misleading market information United KingdomMarket abuse and insider dealing Reprimand or warning

The FCA publicly censured the former construction and services group Carillion plc. The regulator found that between July 2016 and July 2017 the company published misleading information, breaching the prohibition of market manipulation and listing requirements; in July 2017 Carillion had to announce a provision of £845 million. Because the company has been in liquidation since January 2018, no fine was imposed; the FCA stated it would otherwise have been £37.91 million.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing
Legal basis
Art. 15 MAR; Listing Rule 1.3.3R; Listing Principle 1; Premium Listing Principle 2; sections 91 und 123 FSMA 2000
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate

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.

12 Feb 2026 Severn Trent Water LimitedSevern Trent: £1.5m enforcement undertaking after discharges into Broadway Brook United KingdomEmissions and permits €1.72m

The Environment Agency accepted an enforcement undertaking from Severn Trent Water under which the company pays £1,500,000 to Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust, covers the agency's costs and commits to remedial action. It concerns two unauthorised sewage discharges from the Blackminster treatment works near Evesham into Broadway Brook on 12 June and 20 August 2022 and a breach of permit conditions.

What organisations can take from it

An enforcement undertaking avoids prosecution but can still entail payments running into millions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Operating treatment works in line with the permit

Authority / court
Environment Agency
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Reg. 38(1) und 38(2) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010/2016
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities

Original amount 1,500,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Feb 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.

4 Feb 2026 MediaLab.AI, Inc.ICO: £247,590 fine for Imgur operator MediaLab over children's data without age checks United KingdomData protection €287,361

The ICO fined MediaLab.AI, Inc., which operated the Imgur platform in the UK until 30 September 2025, £247,590. The ICO found that Imgur admitted children under 13, stated to be under parental supervision, and relied on consent as its lawful basis, but it had no way of establishing users' ages and therefore of obtaining the required parental consent. The ICO therefore found there was no valid lawful basis and also found that no data protection impact assessment had been carried out (Articles 5(1)(a), 6, 8 and 35 UK GDPR).

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(a), 6, 8 und 35 UK GDPR; section 155(1)(a) DPA 2018
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms

Original amount 247,590 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 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.

3 Feb 2026 Rangecourt SA (vormals Banque Havilland SA)Upper Tribunal: £4m penalty on former Banque Havilland over plan to manipulate the Qatari riyal United KingdomMarket abuse and insider dealing €4.64m

In 2017 staff at the London branch of the Luxembourg private bank Banque Havilland SA (now Rangecourt SA) prepared a paper setting out manipulative trading strategies intended to put pressure on the Qatari riyal and its peg to the US dollar; it was meant for a UAE sovereign wealth fund. On 3 February 2026 the Upper Tribunal upheld the breach of Principle 1 (integrity) but reduced the penalty of 10,000,000 GBP set by the FCA in its Decision Notice of 17 January 2023 to 4,000,000 GBP.

What organisations can take from it

Offering clients strategies that amount to market manipulation breaches a firm's duty of integrity, even if none of it is ever carried out.

Relevance to training and awareness

Integrity: no market manipulation concepts for clients or prospects

Authority / court
Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (Verfahren der Financial Conduct Authority (FCA))
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing
Legal basis
Principle 1 der FCA Principles for Businesses; s. 206 FSMA 2000; Entscheidung nach s. 133 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
reduced
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
According to the findings the paper was not passed on and the strategy was never implemented; the bank itself reported the matter to the Luxembourg supervisor CSSF and to the FCA, cooperated, had it investigated at its own cost of around £2.5m, and the employees involved had left the bank.
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not set out here.
Published
3 Feb 2026

Original amount 4,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Feb 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 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.

29 Jan 2026 Tarmac Building Products LimitedTarmac Building Products: 633,300 GBP after worker's legs crushed on production line United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €731,124

At the Linford plant in 2022 an employee's legs were trapped between metal frames weighing over a tonne because the interlocked access gate did not cut the power to the preceding sections of track. Previous near misses and a risk assessment from years earlier that called for additional control measures were not acted upon; fine of 633,300 GBP plus 5,583 GBP in costs. According to its 2025 annual accounts, the company had an average of 596 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Follow up near misses and outstanding actions from risk assessments – otherwise they prove in court that you knew of the risk.

Authority / court
Chelmsford 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
Construction and real estate
Employees
250 to 999
Published
30 Jan 2026

Original amount 633,300 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Jan 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.

28 Jan 2026 Syngenta LtdSyngenta: 400,000 GBP after uncontrolled release of high-pressure steam during maintenance United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €460,564

While flange bolts were being removed from a steam trap in November 2023, a corroded isolation valve failed and high-pressure steam escaped; the contractor's fitter narrowly escaped serious injury. The agrochemicals group had not maintained work equipment and had not assessed the risk despite known corrosion (only single instead of double isolation). The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecution resulted in a fine of 400,000 GBP plus 8,288 GBP in costs.

What organisations can take from it

Known corrosion requires safer isolation procedures – routine tasks must not mask risks.

Relevance to training and awareness

Isolation and shut-off during maintenance

Authority / court
Health and Safety Executive (Leeds Magistrates' Court)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, reg. 5(1); Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, reg. 3(1)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
28 Jan 2026

Original amount 400,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Jan 2026.

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.

27 Jan 2026 Salford Grab Hire LimitedExcavator bucket used as a prop: mechanic seriously injured – 10,000 GBP for grab hire firm United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €11,517

During the repair of a tipper truck, a JCB bucket without a quick hitch or retaining pin was used to prop up the raised tipper body; the one-tonne bucket fell and seriously injured a mechanic. The business (11 employees according to its micro-entity accounts) had not used suitable props; fine of 10,000 GBP plus 3,475.90 GBP in costs.

What organisations can take from it

Secure raised loads only with props designed for the purpose – improvised supports using work equipment are a typical cause of serious crush injuries.

Authority / court
Warrington 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
Construction and real estate
Employees
Under 50
Published
4 Feb 2026

Original amount 10,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Jan 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.

22 Jan 2026 Stanley Wire LimitedWire drawing company: fatal accident at unguarded machine – 140,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €160,514

In 2021 a 45-year-old employee in Penistone became entangled in an unguarded wire drawing and recoiling machine and died. There was no risk assessment, no safe system of work, no fixed guards or interlocks and no formal training, only verbal instruction; after the accident eight prohibition notices were served. Fine of 140,000 GBP plus 6,652 GBP in costs for the business, which had 17 employees according to its annual accounts.

What organisations can take from it

Provide formal training and physical guarding rather than relying on verbal instruction – make dangerous moving parts technically inaccessible.

Relevance to training and awareness

Machinery safety and formal instruction

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Sheffield 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
Steel and metals
Employees
Under 50
Mitigating circumstances
Early guilty plea
Published
23 Jan 2026

Original amount 140,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Jan 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 Jan 2026 Multi Packaging Solutions UK LimitedPackaging manufacturer: 4.5-tonne machine falls on worker – 433,333 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €496,828

During an improvised relocation of a 4.5-tonne machine without lifting points, using a forklift and skates, the load slid off the forks at the East Kilbride plant in 2023 and struck an employee working underneath it on the head; he suffered permanent damage to his sight, hearing and facial nerves. The lifting operation had not been planned by a competent person; fine of 433,333 GBP. According to its 2024 annual accounts, the company (now Smurfit Westrock Consumer Packaging UK Limited) employed an average of 1,397 people in the United Kingdom.

What organisations can take from it

Have rare, non-routine lifting operations planned separately by a competent person before anyone steps under the load – they are the most dangerous.

Authority / court
Hamilton Sheriff Court (Ermittlung: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Regulation 8(1)(a) und (c) Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Published
21 Jan 2026

Original amount 433,333 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Jan 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.

19 Jan 2026 Derbyshire ConstabularyDerbyshire Constabulary: 60,000 GBP after burn injuries during Molotov cocktail training United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €69,196

During a public order training exercise in February 2021, police officers wearing flame-retardant protective clothing had petrol bombs thrown at them; four officers suffered burns with permanent scarring. There was no information on the service life and testing of the PPE, no risk assessment for the manufacture and use of the petrol bombs, and no safe systems of work. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecution resulted in a fine of 60,000 GBP plus 9,470 GBP in costs.

What organisations can take from it

Realistic operational training also needs a risk assessment and tested protective equipment.

Relevance to training and awareness

Safety in high-risk exercises and PPE testing

Authority / court
Health and Safety Executive (Sheffield Magistrates' Court)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s. 2(1)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Public sector
Published
20 Jan 2026

Original amount 60,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Jan 2026.

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 Jan 2026 Allay Claims LtdICO: £120,000 fine for Allay Claims over marketing texts about PPI tax refunds United KingdomMarketing and consent €138,344

The ICO fined Allay Claims Ltd £120,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that the company had sent a large volume of unsolicited text messages promoting services to reclaim tax on PPI refunds; the enforcement notice gives the period as 1 February 2023 to 13 February 2024. 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
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 120,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jan 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.

8 Jan 2026 Glasgow City CouncilGlasgow City Council: 80,000 GBP after collapse of a rusted-through lamp post United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €92,092

In June 2023, a lamp post dating from the 1950s/60s, whose steel at the base was at least 60 % rusted through, fell over and seriously injured a pedestrian. The post had been rated as poor in 2022 but was not scheduled for replacement until 2024; the council's visual inspections did not identify the acute risk of collapse. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecution resulted in a fine of 80,000 GBP.

What organisations can take from it

Inspection regimes for ageing infrastructure must prioritise findings and trigger immediate action where there is acute danger.

Authority / court
Health and Safety Executive (Glasgow Sheriff Court)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s. 3(1)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Public sector
Published
12 Jan 2026

Original amount 80,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Jan 2026.

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.

6 Jan 2026 Futamura Chemical UK LtdHydrogen sulphide in drainage system: film manufacturer pays 200,000 GBP after death United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €230,867

At the Wigton plant in 2021 an employee collapsed in a pump room after exposure to gas and died; a delivery driver who tried to help also lost consciousness. According to the investigation, the cellulose film manufacturer had not assessed that hydrogen sulphide from the production process could enter the drainage system and be released there; fine of 200,000 GBP plus 20,000 GBP in costs. According to its 2025 annual accounts, the company had an average of 283 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Cover all exposure pathways in risk assessments for hazardous substances – including effluent and drainage systems.

Authority / court
Warrington 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) und 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
250 to 999
Published
8 Jan 2026

Original amount 200,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Jan 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 Dec 2025 Perenco UK LimitedPerenco UK: enforcement undertaking after oil spill in Poole Harbour United KingdomEmissions and permits €459,900

The Environment Agency accepted an enforcement undertaking from Perenco UK: the company pays £401,447 to five local organisations (£60,000, £30,000, £200,547, £10,000 and £100,900), covers the agency's costs and commits to remedial measures. The underlying offence was a breach of a permit condition: an inadequately maintained oil pipe at the Wytch Farm site had corroded, and on 23 March 2023 crude oil or reservoir fluid escaped into Ower Bay in Poole Harbour. According to the agency, the overall package amounts to around £6.1m, including response and clean-up costs and £620,000 paid to affected parties.

What organisations can take from it

Corrosion inspections must be designed to detect wall loss that progresses faster than expected.

Relevance to training and awareness

Pipeline integrity and corrosion monitoring

Authority / court
Environment Agency
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Reg. 38(2) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010/2016; Environmental Civil Sanctions (England) Order 2010
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Substantial costs already incurred for response and clean-up, and measures taken to prevent a recurrence (the agency's reasons for accepting the offer).
Published
13 Mar 2026

Original amount 401,447 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 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.

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.

17 Dec 2025 BeAccount Ltd (Handelsname Payine)FCA bars e-money institution BeAccount from business over customer due diligence failings United KingdomCustomer due diligence Order

The FCA barred BeAccount Ltd (trading as Payine), an authorised e-money institution, with immediate effect from all e-money and payment services, including taking on new customers and new customer funds, and required it to return customer funds and to inform customers and the public. After reviewing client files, the FCA had serious concerns that the institution was not complying with the money laundering rules – on risk assessment, internal policies, customer due diligence and enhanced due diligence for politically exposed persons – and was not managing its risks effectively.

What organisations can take from it

Customer risk ratings must be maintained transparently and reviewed regularly; treating high-risk customers as low risk puts the authorisation at stake.

Relevance to training and awareness

Customer due diligence and customer risk rating

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
reg. 11(1) Electronic Money Regulations 2011; Money Laundering Regulations 2017 (regs. 18, 19, 27, 28 und 35)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance

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.

17 Dec 2025 Greencore Group plcGreencore/Bakkavor: takeover only with sale of sauce plant in Bristol United KingdomMerger control Order

In the planned acquisition of the food manufacturer Bakkavor, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found a substantial lessening of competition in chilled own-label sauces for UK supermarkets. It cleared the merger only because Greencore undertook to sell its entire chilled soups and sauces plant in Bristol, including its employees, to a pre-determined purchaser.

What organisations can take from it

Even overlaps in small product segments can hold up an entire acquisition – prepare remedies early.

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Enterprise Act 2002, s. 73(2) (Undertakings in lieu of reference)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
18 Dec 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.

12 Dec 2025 Police Service of ScotlandICO: £66,000 fine and reprimand for Police Scotland over handling of sensitive data United KingdomData breaches and data security €75,282

The ICO fined the Police Service of Scotland £66,000 and also issued a reprimand. The ICO found that, during a criminal investigation, the police carried out a bulk download of data from the mobile phone of an employee who had made a complaint, without ensuring that this was lawful, fair and limited to what was necessary; it found infringements for the period 18 January to 5 April 2021. For this the ICO issued the reprimand under sections 35 and 37 DPA 2018 (Part 3). The ICO also found that the Professional Standards Department later disclosed this data without authorisation to the person accused, in an internal misconduct investigation. Appropriate technical and organisational measures for compiling such misconduct packs were missing, and the breach was only reported to the ICO on 30 June 2022, although the police had known of it since 17 June 2022. For these infringements the ICO imposed the fine. The combined notice relies, among other provisions, on Articles 5(1)(f) and 32(1) UK GDPR (security of processing), Articles 5(1)(c) and 25 UK GDPR (data minimisation, data protection by design) and Article 33(1) UK GDPR (breach notification).

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(c), 5(1)(f), 25(1)-(2), 32(1) und 33(1) UK GDPR; section 155 DPA 2018 (Geldbuße); sections 35 und 37 DPA 2018 (Part 3), Verwarnung nach Schedule 13 para 2(c) DPA 2018
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector

Original amount 66,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 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.

11 Dec 2025 Nationwide Building SocietyFCA: £44 million against Nationwide over financial crime controls United KingdomCustomer due diligence €50.4m

The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed £44,078,500 (after a 30% discount) because, from October 2016 to July 2021, the building society had no effective systems to keep due diligence and risk assessments for personal customers up to date, and did not identify personal accounts used for business purposes. As a result, one customer received 24 fraudulent Covid furlough payments totalling £27.3 million.

What organisations can take from it

Keep customer profiles continuously up to date – anyone who postpones known weaknesses for years ends up paying for the abuse.

Relevance to training and awareness

Identifying personal accounts used for business purposes

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
FCA Principle 3; SYSC 6.1.1R und 6.3.1R
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
30% settlement discount
Published
12 Dec 2025

Original amount 44,078,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Dec 2025.

Sources

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.

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.

10 Dec 2025 Euro Car Parks LimitedCMA: GBP 473,000 fine for Euro Car Parks for ignoring an information notice United KingdomConsumer protection and online retail €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.

What organisations can take from it

Information requests from authorities must reliably reach the right people and be answered on time – suspecting spam or fraud is no excuse.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

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.

5 Dec 2025 FMP West Midlands LimitedMetal polishing firm: fine after crush injury on unguarded tube polishing machine United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €27,501

While feeding a tube polishing machine that had no guarding and defective rollers, an employee's hand was drawn into the machine; one finger was partially severed and two others were crushed. The business had not prevented access to dangerous machine parts. Fine of £24,000 plus costs. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 16 employees.

What organisations can take from it

In-running nips on rollers must be protected by fixed guards; defective machines must be taken out of service, not kept running.

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
Regulation 11(1) Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Steel and metals
Employees
Under 50
Published
8 Dec 2025

Original amount 24,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Dec 2025.

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.

2 Dec 2025 Post Office LimitedICO: reprimand for Post Office over publication of unredacted settlement deed United KingdomData breaches and data security Reprimand or warning

On 2 December 2025 the ICO issued a reprimand to Post Office Limited. The ICO found that on 25 April 2024 the company put the unredacted version of a settlement deed on its corporate website instead of the intended redacted one, exposing personal data of 502 postmasters who had taken part in the 2017 group litigation linked to the Horizon IT scandal. The ICO concluded that appropriate technical and organisational measures were lacking, in breach of Articles 5(1)(f), 32(1) and 32(2) UK GDPR. No fine was imposed.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(f), 32(1) und 32(2) UK GDPR; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping

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.

1 Dec 2025 British exporter pays 620,515 GBP for unlicensed exports of military goods United KingdomExport control and dual-use goods €706,898

In September 2025, an unnamed British exporter paid a compound settlement of 620,515.04 GBP to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) for unlicensed exports of military goods. HMRC offers such settlements only for unintentional breaches or weaknesses in internal controls and following voluntary disclosure (date = publication).

What organisations can take from it

Weaknesses in internal export control become expensive even without intent – disclosing breaches early can avoid prosecution.

Relevance to training and awareness

Classification of goods and licensing requirements for military goods

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) / Export Control Joint Unit
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Export Control Order 2008
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Defence and security
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary disclosure (prerequisite for the compound settlement)
Published
1 Dec 2025

Original amount 620,515.04 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Dec 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.

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.

25 Nov 2025 Shell UK LimitedShell UK: £560,000 fine after hydrocarbon release on Brent Charlie United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €637,233

Shell UK pleaded guilty to two charges under the offshore fire and explosion regulations (PFEER 1995) and was fined £560,000. On 19 May 2017, around 200 kg of gas and 1,550 kg of crude oil escaped into a concrete leg of the Brent Charlie platform from corroded pipework that had originally been installed only temporarily; the ventilation systems had also been inadequately maintained. More than 170 people on board were exposed to a potential fire and explosion risk.

What organisations can take from it

Temporary installations need a fixed removal date and, until then, their own inspection regime.

Relevance to training and awareness

Management of change for temporary pipework

Authority / court
Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Ermittlung: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Offshore Installations (Prevention of Fire and Explosion, and Emergency Response) Regulations 1995 (PFEER), zwei Anklagepunkte
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea; the court set the fine after taking mitigating factors into account.
Published
28 Nov 2025

Original amount 560,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Nov 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.

20 Nov 2025 LastPass UK LtdICO: £1.2 million against LastPass UK after breach of backup database United KingdomData breaches and data security €1.39m

In 2022, an attacker first compromised an employee's company laptop and then the personal laptop of a senior employee, whose master password he captured using a keylogger. Because the personal and business password vaults were linked via the same master password, he obtained the access and decryption keys stored there and stole data on up to 1.6 million UK users from the backup database. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 35 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Never keep critical keys on employees' personal devices or in their personal accounts – access must be technically separated and restricted.

Relevance to training and awareness

Separation of personal and work devices and credentials

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 Abs. 1 lit. f
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Employees
Under 50
Culpability
negligent
Published
11 Dec 2025

Original amount 1,228,283 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Nov 2025.

Sources

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.

20 Nov 2025 ein Dachdeckerbetrieb in EnglandRoofing contractor: 16,650 GBP after fall through skylight opening United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €18,888

While re-covering a flat roof on a residential property in England, an employee fell more than three metres through an open skylight opening and needed surgery. The business (a micro-enterprise with fewer than 10 employees) had not planned the work at height and had provided neither a crash deck nor netting; fine of 16,650 GBP plus 7,205 GBP in costs.

What organisations can take from it

Secure or provide protection beneath openings before work starts, even on small roofing jobs; planning is mandatory, not optional.

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 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Employees
Under 50
Published
25 Nov 2025

Original amount 16,650 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 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.

11 Nov 2025 Devro (Scotland) LimitedDevro (Scotland): 48,000 GBP fine for discharging industrial wastewater into burn United KingdomEmissions and permits €58,610

In July 2021, a blockage in the foul sewer at the Moodiesburn plant (collagen casings for sausages) caused untreated industrial wastewater to back up into the surface water system, polluting the Bothlin Burn with ammonia and organic load. The company pleaded guilty on 11 November 2025; on 24 March 2026, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) reported a fine of 48,000 GBP plus a 3,600 GBP victim surcharge. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2024, the company had around 316 employees.

What organisations can take from it

On-site drainage needs monitoring and maintenance so that faults in the foul sewer do not reach watercourses via surface water pipes.

Authority / court
Airdrie Sheriff Court (Ermittlungen: SEPA, Anklage: Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulations 4 und 44(1)(a) Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011; Section 20(3)(a) Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Employees
250 to 999
Published
24 Mar 2026

Original amount 51,600 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Nov 2025.

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.

10 Nov 2025 Bank of Scotland PLCOFSI: GBP 160,000 penalty for Bank of Scotland over payments through a designated person's account United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €182,274

On 10 November 2025 OFSI imposed a monetary penalty of GBP 160,000 on Bank of Scotland PLC; without the 50 per cent discount for voluntary disclosure it would have been GBP 320,000, according to OFSI. According to OFSI's findings, between 8 and 24 February 2023 the bank processed 24 payments totalling GBP 77,383.39 through the account of a person designated under Russia sanctions, including credits of GBP 76,000. According to OFSI, screening failed to pick up a variant of the name, and a human error occurred during a PEP review on 20 February 2023. The notice of intent of 28 August 2025 had proposed GBP 175,000. The bank did not request a ministerial review. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Imposition of monetary penalty: Bank of Scotland PLC", 26 January 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/imposition-of-monetary-penalty-bank-of-scotland-plc. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, reg. 11, 12; Geldbuße nach s. 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Published
26 Jan 2026

Original amount 160,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Nov 2025.

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.

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.

30 Oct 2025 Barratt Redrow, Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey u. a. (7 Wohnungsbauunternehmen)CMA: seven housebuilders pay GBP 100m after suspected information exchange United KingdomCartels and collusion €113.6m

The CMA accepted binding commitments from Barratt Redrow, Bellway, Berkeley, Bloor Homes, Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey and Vistry after investigating whether they had exchanged competitively sensitive information such as achieved sale prices. The companies committed to stop sharing such information, introduce compliance measures and annual competition law training, help develop industry guidance and jointly pay GBP 100m to affordable housing programmes; no infringement was found.

What organisations can take from it

Even exchanging current sale prices with competitors can trigger a competition investigation and large payments; contacts with competitors need clear rules and training.

Relevance to training and awareness

Exchanging pricing and sales information with competitors

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Chapter I prohibition Competition Act 1998 (Verdacht); Verpflichtungszusagen nach section 31A Competition Act 1998
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Published
30 Oct 2025

Original amount 100,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 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.

28 Oct 2025 ExxonMobil Chemical LimitedExxonMobil Chemical: 176,000 GBP fine for six days of continuous flaring in Fife United KingdomEmissions and permits €200,913

Following a loss of steam in April 2019, the ethylene plant in Fife flared for almost a week; the smoke significantly exceeded permit limits, and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) received over 900 complaints. Existing procedures and emergency plans should have prevented the incident but were not adequately followed. The company pleaded guilty and was fined 176,000 GBP.

What organisations can take from it

Emergency plans only protect if staff apply them consistently in an emergency – regular drills are part of permit compliance.

Relevance to training and awareness

Compliance with operating and emergency procedures in industrial plants

Authority / court
Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court (Ermittlungen: Scottish Environment Protection Agency, SEPA)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulation 67(1)(b) Pollution Prevention and Control (Scotland) Regulations 2012; Section 2 Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more
Culpability
negligent
Published
28 Oct 2025

Original amount 176,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 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.

24 Oct 2025 Knowles Logistics LimitedLogistics firm: fall from sugar beet conveyor – 133,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €152,418

In 2023 an employee climbed up the side of a sugar beet conveyor to clear a blockage by hand, fell and suffered broken ribs, a lung injury and liver damage. Blockages occurred several times per shift, and there was no safe system for clearing them; fine of 133,000 GBP plus 5,438 GBP in costs. According to its 2024 annual accounts, the company employed an average of 535 people.

What organisations can take from it

Establish a defined, safe procedure for recurring faults – otherwise improvised work at height becomes the norm.

Authority / court
Peterborough 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
Transport, logistics and shipping
Employees
250 to 999
Published
30 Oct 2025

Original amount 133,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Oct 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.

24 Oct 2025 Verus Financial Services LimitedFCA strips Verus Financial Services of permissions after deliberate breach of restriction United KingdomOrganisational requirements Order

The FCA removed all regulated activities from the permission of the financial intermediary Verus Financial Services Limited with immediate effect and imposed an asset restriction. By its own admission the firm had repeatedly and deliberately breached a restriction it had voluntarily accepted in September 2023, which prohibited payments above 5,000 GBP without the FCA's consent, had failed to comply with a Financial Ombudsman Service decision of 30 June 2024 in favour of a customer and, in the FCA's view, had not been open and cooperative.

What organisations can take from it

Restrictions voluntarily agreed with the regulator are binding – deliberately breaching them quickly leads to loss of permission.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
ss. 55J(2)(a)(ii) und 55L(3)(a) FSMA 2000; Threshold Condition para. 2E Schedule 6 FSMA; DISP 3.7.12R; Principles 6 und 11 der FCA Principles for Businesses
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Culpability
intentional

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 Oct 2025 Gate GourmetTribunal: Gate Gourmet files no response – £20,000 to whistleblower United KingdomRetaliation against whistleblowers €23,018

Because Gate Gourmet failed to file a response to the claim despite repeated requests, the Manchester Employment Tribunal found that there had been detriment on grounds of a protected disclosure and in January 2026 awarded £15,000 for loss of earnings and £5,000 for injury to feelings. An application for reconsideration, based on an email inbox that was no longer monitored, was refused.

What organisations can take from it

Correspondence from authorities and courts must go to monitored addresses – missed deadlines turn a defensible claim into a default judgment.

Relevance to training and awareness

Managing deadlines and incoming mail in litigation

Authority / court
Employment Tribunal
Area of law
Whistleblower protection · Retaliation against whistleblowers
Legal basis
Employment Rights Act 1996, s. 47B (Benachteiligung wegen geschützter Offenlegung); Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, Rule 22
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
7 Jan 2026

Original amount 20,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Oct 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.

13 Oct 2025 Bridgnorth Aluminium LimitedAluminium rolling mill: hydraulic arm falls on worker in casting mould – 300,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €345,742

In 2023 a worker was kneeling in a casting mould when the hydraulic launder arm, weighing around 1.5 tonnes, fell on him as a result of hydraulic failure; he was trapped for more than 20 minutes and has not been able to return to work since. The safety bar was not fit for purpose and the risk of the arm falling had never been assessed; fine of 300,000 GBP plus 8,301 GBP in costs. According to its 2025 annual accounts, the plant had an average of 345 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Do not work beneath raised loads – where this cannot be avoided, use tested mechanical fall-prevention devices.

Authority / court
Cannock 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
Steel and metals
Employees
250 to 999
Published
20 Oct 2025

Original amount 300,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Oct 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.

13 Oct 2025 BlueCrest Capital Management (UK) LLPFCA: Public censure for BlueCrest over conflicts between internal and external funds United KingdomOrganisational requirements Reprimand or warning

The FCA publicly censured BlueCrest Capital Management (UK) LLP. Between October 2011 and December 2015 BlueCrest managed external funds for investors as well as an internal fund open only to partners and staff. The FCA found that portfolio managers were moved from the external to the internal fund without the resulting conflict of interest being managed adequately, leaving external investors with an inferior service. Instead of a fine, the FCA took into account BlueCrest's agreement to pay USD 101 million in redress to non-US investors.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
FCA Principle 8 (Interessenkonflikte); section 205 FSMA 2000; section 55L(5) FSMA 2000 (Entschädigungsauflage)
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

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.

9 Oct 2025 South Wales PoliceICO: enforcement notice against South Wales Police over subject access backlog United KingdomData subject rights and transparency Order

The ICO issued an enforcement notice to South Wales Police over serious delays in handling subject access requests. The ICO found that from April 2023 to March 2024 the force answered only 29% of requests on time; in August 2025, 352 requests were overdue, one of them by almost two years. The ICO ordered the force to clear the backlog by June 2026. The legal basis is Articles 12(3), 15(1) and 15(3) UK GDPR and section 45 of the Data Protection Act 2018. According to the notice, the force employs almost 3,000 police officers and over 2,200 other staff.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3), 15(1) und 15(3) UK GDPR; section 45 DPA 2018; section 149 DPA 2018
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
1,000 to 9,999

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.

8 Oct 2025 Manor Farm Dairy LtdManor Farm Dairy: fine after slurry overflow into stream near Dorchester United KingdomEmissions and permits €18,635

In March 2024, cattle slurry ran from the dairy farm's lagoons into a stream, seriously damaging it over more than 2 km, with effects up to 4.5 km downstream. The court imposed a fine of 6,000 GBP (reduced from 9,000 GBP because of an early guilty plea) and 10,158.50 GBP in costs; the Environment Agency described the incident as avoidable. The company is a micro-enterprise with fewer than 10 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Farms must maintain sufficient slurry storage capacity and monitor lagoons.

Authority / court
Taunton Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulations 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Employees
Under 50
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Early guilty plea (fine reduced from 9,000 to 6,000 GBP).
Published
13 Oct 2025

Original amount 16,158.5 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Oct 2025.

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.

7 Oct 2025 Paywiser LimitedFCA halts e-money institution Paywiser and bans unregistered cryptoasset business United KingdomInternal controls Order

The FCA barred Paywiser Limited, an authorised e-money institution, with immediate effect from providing e-money and payment services to new and existing customers and, by a direction under the money laundering rules, also prohibited it from carrying on cryptoasset business without registration. The FCA had serious concerns about its risk management and internal controls, did not consider its sole shareholder fit and proper, saw indications of unregistered cryptoasset business and criticised a lack of openness with the regulator.

What organisations can take from it

New lines of business such as cryptoasset services need their own registration before launch – an existing e-money authorisation does not cover them.

Relevance to training and awareness

Registration requirements for cryptoasset services

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
reg. 11(1) Electronic Money Regulations 2011; regs. 56(1)(f) und 74C Money Laundering Regulations 2017; Principle 11 der FCA Principles for Businesses
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance

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.

6 Oct 2025 Northwood Consumer Limited (heute NP Birmingham Limited)Reversing HGV kills employee: manufacturer pays 240,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €276,021

In 2023 an employee was killed by a reversing HGV on the service road of the shared industrial estate in Birmingham. The company had not assessed the risks of workplace transport, had neither avoided reversing nor made it safer with banksmen or signage, and had not controlled HGV access; fine of 240,000 GBP plus 6,917 GBP in costs. According to its 2024 annual accounts, the company employed an average of 37 people.

What organisations can take from it

Set clear rules for workplace transport: avoid or safeguard reversing and separate pedestrian routes from vehicle routes.

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) und 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
Under 50
Published
7 Oct 2025

Original amount 240,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Oct 2025.

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.

2 Oct 2025 Lanes Group LimitedLanes Group: fatal accident with high-pressure hose – 800,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €917,326

While a high-pressure jetting system was being primed in freezing conditions in 2022, a pressure release occurred and the end of the hose struck a drainage engineer in the face; he died two and a half weeks later. There was no safe system of work, jetting vices were not properly maintained, monitoring was lacking, and information, instruction, training and supervision were insufficient; fine of 800,000 GBP (reduced from 1.2 million GBP for an early guilty plea) plus 8,680 GBP in costs. According to its consolidated accounts (financial year to July 2024), the company employed 2,268 people and the group 3,610.

What organisations can take from it

Make routine safe with high-pressure equipment: always secure hose ends mechanically, include weather risks such as frost in work instructions and check compliance.

Relevance to training and awareness

Safe working with high-pressure water jetting equipment

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
City of London 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
Construction and real estate
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Mitigating circumstances
Early guilty plea (reduction from 1.2 million GBP to 800,000 GBP)
Published
6 Oct 2025

Original amount 800,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Oct 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.

25 Sep 2025 TicketmasterTicketmaster commits to price transparency following Oasis presale United KingdomMisleading advertising and pricing 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.

What organisations can take from it

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

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.

23 Sep 2025 O-I Glass LimitedO-I Glass: missing cab door on shovel loader, worker scalded – 600,000 GBP United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €687,364

At the Alloa glassworks, a shovel loader used to clear molten glass waste and hot water had been missing the protective cab door for almost two years, although the damage had been reported and other drivers had already been struck. In 2024 material spilled into the cab and scalded a 32-year-old; fine of 600,000 GBP. According to the HSE (Health and Safety Executive, Britain's workplace safety regulator), around 500 people work at the site; according to its 2024 annual accounts, the company employed an average of 642 people.

What organisations can take from it

Set up a binding repair process for reported damage to safety equipment – a report that is not acted upon is a documented failure.

Authority / court
Stirling Sheriff Court (Ermittlung: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Regulation 5(1) Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998; Section 33(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
250 to 999
Published
30 Sep 2025

Original amount 600,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Sep 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.

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.

10 Sep 2025 Colorcon LimitedPharmaceutical supplier Colorcon paid Moscow salaries via sanctioned banks United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €176,590

In 2022, the Moscow office of the British subsidiary made payments – mainly salaries – to accounts at Alfa-Bank, Promsvyazbank, Sberbank and VTB; after deduction of payments covered by a general licence, around 128,300 GBP remained in breach. The approval process in the UK checked only the amount and the recipient, not the bank; because of a four-month delay in reporting, HM Treasury's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) granted only a 35% instead of a 50% reduction. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 280 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone approving payments must also screen the recipient's bank against sanctions lists – and report breaches discovered without delay.

Relevance to training and awareness

Payment approval with screening of the recipient bank, prompt reporting

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, reg. 12
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
250 to 999
Mitigating circumstances
Disclosure and full cooperation, but delayed
Published
30 Sep 2025

Original amount 152,750 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Sep 2025.

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.

9 Sep 2025 Imerys Minerals LimitedImerys Minerals: £430,000 enforcement undertaking over china clay discharges United KingdomEmissions and permits €496,364

The Environment Agency accepted an enforcement undertaking from Imerys Minerals: the company pays £430,000 to Westcountry Rivers Trust and covers the agency's costs. Between September 2021 and July 2023, china clay effluent had been discharged without a permit at six sites in Cornwall.

What organisations can take from it

Unauthorised discharges at several sites can together lead to a substantial payment.

Relevance to training and awareness

Permit requirements for discharges from mineral extraction

Authority / court
Environment Agency
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Reg. 38(1) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010/2016
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other

Original amount 430,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 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.

8 Sep 2025 Vanquis Bank LimitedOFSI: breach by Vanquis Bank published instead of a penalty after a delayed account freeze United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes Other

On 8 September 2025 OFSI published a report on sanctions breaches by Vanquis Bank Limited but did not impose a monetary penalty. According to OFSI's findings, the account of a person designated under counter-terrorism sanctions remained fully usable for eight days after the designation; during that time GBP 200 was withdrawn in cash and a purchase of GBP 8.99 was made. OFSI had given the bank advance notice the day before the designation. According to OFSI, the staff responsible had been redeployed to remediation work, so the internal one-day deadline for the freeze was missed. The bank reported the breach itself, but only 13 days after the designation. Type of measure: Breach published by OFSI instead of a monetary penalty (disclosure under s. 149(3) PACA 2017). The publication does not mention any pending review. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Disclosure notice: 08 September 2025", 8 September 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/disclosure-notice-08-september-2025. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
regulations 11 and 12 of the Counter-Terrorism (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019; Veröffentlichung nach section 149(3) Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Published
8 Sep 2025

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.

28 Aug 2025 Home Improvement Marketing LtdICO: £300,000 fine for Home Improvement Marketing over 2.4 million automated calls United KingdomMarketing and consent €347,343

The ICO fined Home Improvement Marketing Ltd £300,000 and issued an enforcement notice. After executing a search warrant in March 2024, it found that between 31 May and 31 August 2023 the company had instigated 2,449,380 automated marketing calls without prior consent; 274 complaints were received. According to the ICO, the software responded to recipients' answers and offered no way to opt out of further calls. The legal basis is regulations 19 and 24 of PECR.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulations 19 und 24 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate

Original amount 300,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Aug 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 Aug 2025 Green Spark Energy LtdICO: £250,000 fine for Green Spark Energy over 9.6 million automated marketing calls United KingdomMarketing and consent €289,452

The ICO fined Green Spark Energy Ltd £250,000 and issued an enforcement notice. After executing a search warrant in March 2024, the regulator found that from May 2023 to May 2024 the company had instigated 9,587,050 automated calls carrying recorded marketing messages; 497 complaints were received. According to the ICO, the recordings contained misleading statements designed to pressure homeowners, for example about supposed risks of their existing loft insulation. The legal basis is regulations 19 and 24 of PECR.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulations 19 und 24 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate

Original amount 250,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Aug 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.

27 Aug 2025 Bristol City CouncilICO: enforcement notice against Bristol City Council over unanswered subject access requests United KingdomData subject rights and transparency Order

The ICO issued an enforcement notice to Bristol City Council because it found that the council had not responded to subject access requests as required by law. The notice relies on Articles 12(3), 15(1) and 15(3) UK GDPR and examines, among other things, the period from 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3), 15(1) und 15(3) UK GDPR; section 149 DPA 2018
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector

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.

26 Aug 2025 GXO Logistics, Inc. und Wincanton LimitedGXO/Wincanton: supermarket warehouse logistics must be sold after takeover United KingdomMerger control Order

GXO had already acquired Wincanton in April 2024; the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) imposed a hold-separate order, appointed a monitoring trustee and, in Phase 2, found a lessening of competition in dedicated warehousing services for grocery retail. Under the final undertakings, GXO committed to divest Wincanton’s business serving supermarket customers.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone completing a deal before the merger review has concluded bears the risk of having to give up parts of the acquired business again.

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Enterprise Act 2002, ss. 41, 82, 90 (Final Undertakings)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping

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.

8 Aug 2025 Fletcher Plant LimitedWaste broker breaches duty of care in illegal dumping – 117,587 GBP incl. confiscation United KingdomWaste and hazardous substances €135,610

Acting as a waste broker, the Sheffield company arranged in 2019/2020 for more than 1,400 tonnes of waste to be transported to an illegally operated site in Lincolnshire without continuously checking the operator's authorisations. The court imposed a fine of 80,000 GBP and a confiscation order of 37,587.13 GBP (117,587.13 GBP in total) plus 50,000 GBP in costs. According to its 2024 annual accounts, the company had an average of 104 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Treat due diligence on waste contractors as an ongoing task, not a one-off: check their authorisations regularly throughout the contract.

Relevance to training and awareness

Duty of care when engaging waste contractors

Authority / court
Nottingham Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
Legal basis
Section 34(1)(a) und 34(6) Environmental Protection Act 1990 (Duty of Care)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping
Employees
50 to 249
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
The court accepted that the company did not know the site was operating illegally; first prosecution in over 40 years, new management team
Published
13 Aug 2025

Original amount 117,587.13 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Aug 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.

30 Jul 2025 Yorkshire Water Services LimitedYorkshire Water: chlorinated water kills more than 430 fish – 865,000 GBP United KingdomEmissions and permits €1m

After an inlet valve failed at Ingbirchworth water treatment works, around one million litres of chlorinated water a day flowed via the emergency overflow into Ingbirchworth Dike from November 2017; more than 430 dead fish were found on a single day. The capacity alarm was set above the overflow level; fine of 865,000 GBP plus 34,979.79 GBP in costs. According to its annual accounts (to March 2026), the utility employed an average of 4,481 people.

What organisations can take from it

Set alarm thresholds so that they trigger before the point of damage – monitoring that only reports after an overflow is not a control.

Authority / court
Sheffield Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulation 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Culpability
negligent
Repeat case
yes
Published
31 Jul 2025

Original amount 865,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Jul 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.

29 Jul 2025 Sigma Broking LimitedFCA: £1.09m fine for Sigma Broking over deficient transaction reports United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €1.26m

The FCA fined Sigma Broking Limited £1,087,300. The FCA found that between December 2018 and December 2023 almost all of the firm's transaction reports were incomplete or inaccurate, affecting 924,584 transactions. The cause was a reporting system set up incorrectly from the start, whose errors were not fixed for years. The fine includes a 30% discount.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
Art. 26 UK MiFIR; FCA Principle 3; section 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 1,087,300 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Jul 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 Jul 2025 East Midlands Airport LtdEast Midlands Airport: £892,500 fine over de-icing fluid in drainage water United KingdomEmissions and permits €1.03m

Derby Crown Court imposed three fines of £297,500 each (£892,500 in total) and £65,687.54 in costs on the operator of East Midlands Airport. In January and February 2022, surface water drainage containing residues of aircraft and runway de-icing fluid exceeded the permitted BOD limit of 15 mg/l on three occasions. The court heard that there had already been 13 permit breaches and ten written warnings since 2006.

What organisations can take from it

Repeated limit breaches despite earlier warnings push the level of the penalty up significantly.

Relevance to training and awareness

Complying with discharge limits during de-icing

Authority / court
Derby Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Reg. 38(2) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping
Repeat case
yes
Mitigating circumstances
Change of management in 2022 and active engagement with the Environment Agency (as put forward by the company).
Published
28 Jul 2025

Original amount 892,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Jul 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.

24 Jul 2025 Barents Reinsurance S.A., London BranchPRA: £1.785m fine on the London branch of Barents Reinsurance United KingdomOrganisational requirements €2.06m

The PRA fined the London branch of the Luxembourg reinsurer Barents Reinsurance S.A. 1,785,000 GBP – its first fine on a firm operating purely as a reinsurer. Between July 2021 and October 2023 the branch had not prepared adequately for the UK rules applying after Brexit, implemented internal audit recommendations late, lacked proportionate governance and a business continuity plan tailored to its UK business, and submitted regulatory reports late.

What organisations can take from it

Branches of foreign insurers must also adapt governance, continuity planning and regulatory reporting to local supervisory rules as soon as those rules apply.

Authority / court
Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
PRA Fundamental Rule 6; Conditions Governing Business 2.3 und 2.6; Reporting 2.1 und 2.5 (PRA Rulebook); s. 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Early admissions and cooperation (15% reduction) and settlement (30% discount; 2,550,000 GBP without it); substantial remediation costs; in the PRA's view the breaches were neither deliberate nor reckless.
Published
28 Jul 2025

Original amount 1,785,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Jul 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.

14 Jul 2025 Barclays Bank PlcFCA: £39.3m fine for Barclays Bank Plc over money laundering risks of a corporate client United KingdomCustomer due diligence €45.4m

On 14 July 2025 the FCA fined Barclays Bank Plc £39,314,700 for breaching Principle 2 (due skill, care and diligence). The FCA found that between January 2015 and April 2021 the bank did not properly identify, assess and monitor the money laundering risks posed by one corporate client: apart from March 2019 to May 2020 it treated the client as low risk without knowing enough about its business or where its wealth and funds came from, and it did not reassess that rating when new warning signs emerged. Barclays settled with the FCA and received a 30% discount; without it the fine would have been £56,163,900.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
FCA Principle 2; section 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 39,314,700 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Jul 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.

14 Jul 2025 Barclays Bank UK PLCFCA: £3.1m fine for Barclays Bank UK over opening a client money account for a wealth manager United KingdomCustomer due diligence €3.57m

The FCA fined Barclays Bank UK PLC £3,093,600. The FCA found that between January 2021 and April 2023 the bank did not gather sufficient information on the purpose and risks of a client money account it opened for a wealth manager; around £34 million was paid into the account. The FCA saw this as evidence of wider weaknesses in opening such accounts. The bank also agreed a voluntary payment of about £6.3 million for the wealth manager's clients.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
FCA Principle 3; SYSC 6.1.1R; section 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 3,093,600 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Jul 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.

9 Jul 2025 Vocalink LimitedBank of England: £11.9m fine on Vocalink for failing to comply with a direction United KingdomOrganisational requirements €13.8m

The Bank of England fined Vocalink Limited, a service provider to systemically important payment systems, 11,900,000 GBP – its first fine on a financial market infrastructure firm. Vocalink had not fully implemented a direction of June 2021 to remedy identified weaknesses in its systems and controls by the extended deadline of 28 February 2022, yet confirmed compliance to the Bank. According to the Bank, the causes were an insufficiently integrated risk management framework for the remediation programme and critical assurance reports that were not passed on to the risk function, internal audit and the board.

What organisations can take from it

Before a firm confirms to its regulator that it has complied with a direction, every critical assurance report must have reached its governing bodies.

Relevance to training and awareness

Escalating negative assurance findings to governing bodies

Authority / court
Bank of England
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
ss. 191 und 196 Banking Act 2009
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
Cooperation with early admission (15% reduction) and settlement (a further 30%); 20,000,000 GBP without the reductions; significant investment in remediating the weaknesses.
Published
9 Jul 2025

Original amount 11,900,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Jul 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.

8 Jul 2025 Britischer Exporteur (von HMRC nicht genannt, anonymisiert)Exporter pays £1.16m – then the largest settlement over Russia sanctions United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €1.34m

A UK exporter not named by HMRC paid a compound settlement of £1,160,725.67 in May 2025 over alleged breaches of the Russia sanctions. According to HMRC, it had made goods available to Russia. According to HMRC, it was at the time of the notice the largest settlement the authority had concluded for a breach of the Russia sanctions; among the lessons, HMRC highlights the risk of supplying Russian companies with operations in third countries.

What organisations can take from it

Recipients in third countries must be checked for whether they are Russian companies.

Relevance to training and awareness

Screening recipients in third countries for connections to Russia

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Published
8 Jul 2025

Original amount 1,160,725.67 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Jul 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.

7 Jul 2025 Monzo Bank LimitedFCA: £21 million against Monzo over lax account opening for high-risk customers United KingdomCustomer due diligence €24.5m

The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed £21,091,300 (after a 30% discount) because, from 2018 to 2020, Monzo onboarded customers on the basis of sparse and sometimes obviously implausible information – such as well-known London landmarks given as addresses. Despite a requirement not to take on any more high-risk customers, the bank opened more than 34,000 such accounts up to 2022. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2026, the company had around 4,591 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Automated onboarding needs plausibility checks – and supervisory requirements must be implemented in a technically effective way.

Relevance to training and awareness

Plausibility checks in customer onboarding

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
FCA Principle 3 (PRIN 3); s. 55L FSMA (Verstoß gegen Auflage)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Mitigating circumstances
30% settlement discount
Published
8 Jul 2025

Original amount 21,091,300 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 Jul 2025.

Sources

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.

26 Jun 2025 DYS 44 Art Gallery LimitedArt dealer DYS 44 Art Gallery: £158,679 fine for money laundering failings United KingdomInternal controls €185,916

HMRC imposed a penalty of £158,679 under the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 on the gallery, which is supervised for anti-money laundering purposes as an art market participant. The failings concerned risk assessment, policies and controls, staff training, due diligence, the timing of verification and record keeping; no appeal was lodged.

What organisations can take from it

Art dealers too must identify buyers in good time and document every check.

Relevance to training and awareness

Anti-money laundering duties in the art trade, especially timely identity verification

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
Reg. 18, 19, 24, 28, 30, 40 und 41 Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Published
26 Jun 2025

Original amount 158,679 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Jun 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.

24 Jun 2025 BirthlinkICO: £18,000 fine for charity Birthlink over destroyed records United KingdomData breaches and data security €21,109

The ICO fined the Scottish charity Birthlink £18,000. The ICO found that the organisation had destroyed around 4,800 personal records; according to the ICO, up to ten per cent of them may be irreplaceable.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(f), 5(2), 32(1)-(2) und 33 UK GDPR; section 155 DPA 2018
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 18,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Jun 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.

17 Jun 2025 Safran S.A.Safran/Collins: clearance only in exchange for sale of actuation businesses United KingdomMerger control Order

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found that Safran’s acquisition of part of the actuation and flight control business of Collins Aerospace (RTX) would result in a substantial lessening of competition in horizontal stabiliser trim actuators. Clearance was granted only in return for the undertaking to divest Safran’s North American actuation business, including sites in Mexico, California and Canada, to a pre-approved purchaser (Woodward).

What organisations can take from it

In acquisitions in concentrated supply markets, prepare remedies including a buyer early – here the CMA required an upfront buyer.

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Enterprise Act 2002, s. 73 (Undertakings in lieu of reference)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
23 Jun 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.

16 Jun 2025 Farringdon Energy Limited (Handelsname Champion Energy)Ofgem: GBP 214,580 fine for Farringdon Energy over direct debits without supply United KingdomConsumer protection and online retail €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.

What organisations can take from it

Even micro-businesses need documented processes – knowledge held by only one employee is not compliance.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

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.

6 Jun 2025 AmazonAmazon commits to the CMA to tougher action against fake reviews United KingdomFake 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.

What organisations can take from it

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
Sources

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.

6 Jun 2025 South Yorkshire PoliceICO: Reprimand for South Yorkshire Police after loss of body-worn video footage United KingdomData breaches and data security Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to South Yorkshire Police. The ICO found that during a data transfer in July 2023, carried out by a third-party supplier within the digital evidence management system, 96,174 original body-worn video recordings were accidentally deleted. The ICO found that the force lacked appropriate technical and organisational security measures and could not demonstrate compliance. The action was based on the law-enforcement processing rules in Part 3 of the DPA 2018.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
section 34(3) und section 40 DPA 2018 (Part 3)
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector

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.

5 Jun 2025 23andMe, Inc.ICO: £2.31 million against 23andMe after credential stuffing targeting genetic data United KingdomData breaches and data security €2.74m

From April to September 2023, attackers used reused credentials to access data on 155,592 people in the United Kingdom, including ancestry, family trees and health information. There was no MFA, no secure password rules and no effective monitoring; despite anomalies in July 2023, the full investigation only began in October. Joint investigation by the UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.

What organisations can take from it

Companies that manage genetic or health data must protect customer accounts against credential stuffing with MFA and investigate warning signs immediately.

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 Abs. 1
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Healthcare
Employees
250 to 999
Culpability
negligent
Published
17 Jun 2025

Original amount 2,310,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Jun 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.

30 May 2025 Southern Gas Networks plcSouthern Gas Networks plc: 5.8 million GBP – gas leaks attended too slowly United KingdomOther €6.89m

In 2022/23, the gas distribution network operator failed to meet the licence requirement in its southern England network to attend 97% of reported gas escapes within one or two hours respectively. Following self-reporting, it acknowledged the breach and paid 5.8 million GBP into the Energy Industry Voluntary Redress Fund; the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) pointed to the significant risk to the public.

What organisations can take from it

Emergency response times are a core duty for utility networks – staff and deployment planning must also cover peak loads.

Authority / court
Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
Area of law
Other
Legal basis
Gas Transporter Licence, Standard Special Condition D10 2(h)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Self-reporting before the formal data submission; targets met for two years since.

Original amount 5,800,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 May 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.

30 May 2025 Cadent Gas LimitedCadent Gas Limited: 1.5 million GBP – gas leaks attended too slowly United KingdomOther €1.78m

In 2022/23, the gas distribution network operator failed to meet the licence requirement in its North London and North West networks to attend 97% of reported gas escapes within one or two hours respectively. Following self-reporting, it acknowledged the breach and paid 1.5 million GBP into the Energy Industry Voluntary Redress Fund; the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) pointed to the significant risk to the public.

What organisations can take from it

Emergency response times are a core duty for utility networks – staff and deployment planning must also cover peak loads.

Authority / court
Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
Area of law
Other
Legal basis
Gas Transporter Licence, Standard Special Condition D10 2(h)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Self-reporting before the formal data submission; targets met for two years since.

Original amount 1,500,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 May 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.

30 May 2025 Scotland Gas Networks plcScotland Gas Networks plc: 700,000 GBP – gas leaks attended too slowly United KingdomOther €832,145

In 2022/23, the gas distribution network operator failed to meet the licence requirement in its Scottish network to attend 97% of reported gas escapes within one or two hours respectively. Following self-reporting, it acknowledged the breach and paid 700,000 GBP into the Energy Industry Voluntary Redress Fund; the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) pointed to the significant risk to the public.

What organisations can take from it

Emergency response times are a core duty for utility networks – staff and deployment planning must also cover peak loads.

Authority / court
Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
Area of law
Other
Legal basis
Gas Transporter Licence, Standard Special Condition D10 2(h)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Self-reporting before the formal data submission; targets met for two years since.

Original amount 700,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 May 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.

30 May 2025 Yorkshire Water Services LimitedYorkshire Water: faulty backup pump ignored for months – 350,000 GBP United KingdomEmissions and permits €416,072

The backup pump at Fossbridge pumping station in York was out of action for five months, although the defect had repeatedly been noted during maintenance; as a result, sewage flowed into Foss Dyke in March 2018. For the discharge and the breach of the maintenance permit condition, the court imposed 350,000 GBP plus 14,028.65 GBP in costs. According to its annual accounts (to March 2026), the utility employed an average of 4,481 people (previous year 3,876).

What organisations can take from it

Give repair orders for emergency equipment deadlines and escalation – a defect noted repeatedly is proof of knowledge in court.

Authority / court
York Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulation 12(1)(b), 38(1)(a) und 38(2) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Published
30 May 2025

Original amount 350,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 May 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.

23 May 2025 Vifor Pharma UK Limited u. a. (CSL-Konzern)CMA: Vifor pays GBP 23m to the NHS after suspected disparagement of a rival United KingdomAbuse of market power €27.4m

The CMA had investigated whether, between 2010 and 2024, Vifor abused a suspected dominant position in high-dose intravenous iron by spreading potentially misleading claims about the safety of the rival product Monofer compared with its own Ferinject. It accepted binding commitments: a voluntary payment of GBP 23m to the NHS, a corrective communication campaign aimed at healthcare professionals and additional compliance measures; no infringement was found.

What organisations can take from it

Safety claims about competing products made to healthcare professionals must be substantiated and balanced – disparagement can be pursued as an abuse of market power.

Relevance to training and awareness

Claims about competitor products in pharmaceutical marketing

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Chapter II prohibition, section 18(1) Competition Act 1998 (Verdacht); Verpflichtungszusagen nach section 31A Competition Act 1998
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Published
23 May 2025

Original amount 23,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 May 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.

16 May 2025 London Borough of Hammersmith and FulhamICO: Reprimand for London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham over hidden data in FOI response United KingdomData breaches and data security Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham. The ICO found that, in answering a Freedom of Information request, the council released a spreadsheet that contained hidden data. This exposed personal data of 6,528 people, 2,342 of them children. The ICO criticised inadequate security measures and a failure to demonstrate compliance.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(f), 5(2), 24(1), 32(1)(b) UK GDPR; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector

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 May 2025 Greater Manchester PoliceICO: Reprimand for Greater Manchester Police over subject access request backlog United KingdomData subject rights and transparency Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police. The ICO found that, because of a persistent backlog of historic requests, the force repeatedly failed to answer subject access requests on time. The ICO found infringements of both the UK GDPR and the law-enforcement provisions of the DPA 2018.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3) und Art. 15 UK GDPR; section 45 und section 54 DPA 2018 (Part 3); Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
10,000 or more

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.

7 May 2025 Spreadex LimitedSpreadex: £2.02m fine for anti-money laundering and player protection breaches United KingdomInternal controls €2.38m

The Gambling Commission imposed a financial penalty of £2,022,000, a warning and an additional licence condition on the betting operator. Between September 2022 and November 2023 the company breached the anti-money laundering licence condition LC 12.1.1, a customer interaction requirement (SRCP 3.4.3 para. 9c) and a specific condition of its licence; it had also not sufficiently considered the AML guidance in OCP 2.1.1. The Commission had already announced a payment by Spreadex in August 2022.

What organisations can take from it

Specific licence conditions from earlier cases must be demonstrably met; breaching them aggravates the consequences.

Relevance to training and awareness

Complying with specific licence conditions imposed after earlier cases

Authority / court
Gambling Commission
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
LC 12.1.1 Abs. 1–3, SRCP 3.4.3 Abs. 9c, besondere Lizenzauflage und OCP 2.1.1 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
15 May 2025

Original amount 2,022,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 May 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.

14 Apr 2025 eine kleine Anwaltskanzlei in EnglandICO: £60,000 against a law firm over hack and late notification United KingdomData breaches and data security €69,458

In 2022, attackers used brute force to penetrate the law firm's network via a rarely used administrator account without MFA and stole 32 GB of highly sensitive data, which appeared on the dark web. The firm only learned of this from the National Crime Agency and reported the incident to the UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) only 43 days later.

What organisations can take from it

Even small law firms need MFA on admin accounts and a reporting process that meets the 72-hour deadline.

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 Abs. 1 und 2, Art. 33 Abs. 1
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Employees
Under 50
Culpability
negligent
Published
16 Apr 2025

Original amount 60,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Apr 2025.

Sources

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.

11 Apr 2025 Svarog Shipping & Trading Company LimitedTanker shipping company Svarog left OFSI information request unanswered United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €5,768

In the context of investigations into dealings with a Sovcomflot subsidiary, the fuel shipping company registered in the UK and operating from Cyprus did not respond in time to a formal information request from HM Treasury's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI); a response only came after contact via its auditors. No sanctions breach as such was found, but the information offence was.

What organisations can take from it

Information requests from sanctions authorities need a clear intake channel and deadline monitoring – merely missing the deadline is already an offence.

Relevance to training and awareness

Handling requests from authorities and deadlines

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, regs. 72, 74(1)(a)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Minor, indirect harm; the response was provided subsequently
Published
8 May 2025

Original amount 5,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Apr 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.

9 Apr 2025 Britisches Exportunternehmen, Militärgüter (anonymisiert)UK exporter pays £3.23m for unlicensed exports of military goods United KingdomExport control and dual-use goods €3.74m

A UK company not named by HMRC paid a compound settlement of £3,231,762.40 in February 2025 in lieu of prosecution over the alleged export of military goods without the licence required under the Export Control Order 2008. HMRC set out the facts in these terms. It was the largest of three settlements totalling close to £3.7 million that HMRC concluded between January and March 2025; no sanctions offences were involved.

What organisations can take from it

Before every export, check whether the goods are military-listed and obtain the appropriate licence.

Relevance to training and awareness

Classification of goods and licensing requirements for military goods

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Export Control Order 2008; Customs and Excise Management Act 1979
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Defence and security
Published
9 Apr 2025

Original amount 3,231,762.4 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Apr 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.

1 Apr 2025 Ford, Volkswagen, BMW u. a. (10 Fahrzeughersteller sowie die Verbände ACEA und SMMT)CMA: GBP 77.7m fine for carmakers over recycling and advertising collusion United KingdomCartels and collusion €92.9m

The CMA found two cartel infringements: from 2002 to 2017 the manufacturers had agreed not to advertise recyclability rates above the statutory minimum of 85%, and from 2004 to 2018 eight of them, later joined by others, had operated a buyers' cartel agreeing not to pay companies that recycle end-of-life vehicles. Under settlement, fines totalling GBP 77,688,917 were imposed: Ford 18,541,929, Volkswagen 14,755,900, BMW 11,060,925, Nissan/Renault 9,979,826 jointly plus 2,800,646 for Nissan alone, Peugeot Citroën/Stellantis 5,189,948, Vauxhall/Opel (with General Motors and Stellantis as former and current owners) 5,171,248 in total, Jaguar Land Rover 4,626,404, Toyota 4,502,760, Mitsubishi 898,531, ACEA 114,000 and SMMT 46,800 GBP. Mercedes-Benz had reported the cartel and received full immunity; the European Commission adopted its own decision for the EU on the same day.

What organisations can take from it

Agreements on green advertising or purchasing terms reached in trade association meetings are still cartels – sustainability goals do not justify coordination between competitors.

Relevance to training and awareness

Sustainability agreements and buyers' cartels in trade association meetings

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Chapter I prohibition, section 2(1) Competition Act 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Automotive
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
20% settlement discount for all addressees; additional leniency reductions for Peugeot Citroën and Vauxhall/Opel together with their current and former owners Stellantis and General Motors (45%), the SMMT (35%) and Mitsubishi (25%); full immunity for Mercedes-Benz as the first to report.
Published
1 Apr 2025

Original amount 77,688,917 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Apr 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.

27 Mar 2025 AFK Letters Co LtdICO: £90,000 fine for AFK Letters Co over unwanted marketing calls United KingdomMarketing and consent €108,020

The ICO fined AFK Letters Co Ltd £90,000 and also issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that between January and September 2023 the company made around 95,000 marketing calls to numbers registered with the Telephone Preference Service, which led to complaints to the ICO and the TPS. The company could not show that the people called had consented. Early payment reduces the penalty to £72,000.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 21 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 90,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Mar 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.

26 Mar 2025 Advanced Computer Software Group LtdICO: £3 million against NHS service provider Advanced after ransomware without MFA United KingdomData processors €3.68m

Advanced, a processor for the NHS and care providers, was attacked with ransomware in August 2022 via a customer account without multi-factor authentication; services such as NHS 111 were disrupted. Data on 79,404 people was stolen, including instructions on how to gain entry to the homes of 890 people receiving care at home.

What organisations can take from it

MFA must apply to every single access point without gaps – one unprotected account is enough for attackers.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data processors
Legal basis
UK GDPR Art. 32 Abs. 1 (als Auftragsverarbeiter)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Provisionally £6.09 million; reduced, among other things, for proactive cooperation with the NCSC and the National Crime Agency.
Published
27 Mar 2025

Original amount 3,076,320 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Mar 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.

21 Mar 2025 BT, IMG, ITV, BBC (Sky Kronzeuge)CMA: 4.24 million GBP against BT, IMG, ITV and BBC over collusion on freelancer fees United KingdomCartels and collusion €5.06m

Sports broadcasters and production companies exchanged sensitive information in 15 instances about day rates and fee increases for freelance camera operators and sound technicians in order to coordinate pay. Fines: BT 1,738,453 GBP, IMG 1,737,820 GBP, BBC 424,165 GBP, ITV 339,918 GBP; Sky received immunity as the first to come forward.

What organisations can take from it

HR and the procurement of freelance work are also subject to competition law – salary and fee information must not be shared with competitors.

Relevance to training and awareness

Exchanges about salaries and fees with competitors (labour market)

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Chapter I Competition Act 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
20 % settlement discount for all; leniency discounts for BT, IMG, ITV; immunity for Sky
Published
21 Mar 2025

Original amount 4,240,356 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 Mar 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.

20 Mar 2025 The London Metal Exchange (LME)London Metal Exchange: 9.2 million GBP – controls and escalation failed in nickel turmoil United KingdomCritical infrastructure €11m

When the nickel price rose to over 100,000 USD within just over an hour on 8 March 2022, only junior staff were on duty during Asian trading hours, and they had not been trained to recognise a disorderly market; they did not escalate and even switched off price bands. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed a fine on the recognised investment exchange for the first time: 9.2 million GBP after a 30% discount.

What organisations can take from it

Critical infrastructure needs trained staff around the clock and clear escalation paths – including at night and at off-peak times.

Relevance to training and awareness

Escalation of unusual market conditions; training of shift staff

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Information security and cyber · Critical infrastructure
Legal basis
FCA REC 2.5.1 (Recognition Requirements); Art. 18 RTS 7 (MiFID II)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
Early settlement (30% discount); improvements since March 2022.

Original amount 9,200,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Mar 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.

14 Mar 2025 Greater Manchester PoliceICO: Reprimand for Greater Manchester Police over lost CCTV footage and late subject access response United KingdomData breaches and data security Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police. The ICO found that CCTV footage from a police station custody suite in 2021, which was to be retained because of serious allegations against officers, was not checked for completeness when it was preserved and was partly lost. In addition, the individual concerned did not receive their data on time after a subject access request. The action was based on the law-enforcement processing rules in the DPA 2018.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
section 45(3)(a) und (b) DPA 2018; sechster Datenschutzgrundsatz (section 40 DPA 2018, Part 3)
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
10,000 or more

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.

14 Mar 2025 Sahara Hands; Peculiar Peoples' Palace Ministries; Impact PlanetOFSI: breaches of information requirements by three charities published instead of a penalty United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes Other

On 14 March 2025 OFSI published a report on breaches by three UK charities – Sahara Hands, Peculiar Peoples' Palace Ministries and Impact Planet – of information requirements under counter-terrorism sanctions law; OFSI did not impose a monetary penalty. According to OFSI's findings, the organisations had failed without reasonable excuse to provide information in response to a formal request, despite three letters. OFSI made clear that this concerns an information offence only and that it holds no information indicating any further breach of the sanctions regulations. OFSI considers it possible that out-of-date contact details on the Charity Commission register played a role, but did not treat this as mitigating. Type of measure: Breach published by OFSI instead of a monetary penalty (disclosure under s. 149(3) PACA 2017). The publication does not mention any pending review. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Disclosure notice: 14 March 2025", 14 March 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/disclosure-notice-14-march-2025. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Counter-Terrorism (International Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, reg. 36(6); Veröffentlichung nach s. 149(3) Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Published
14 Mar 2025

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.

21 Feb 2025 Royal Bank of Canada, Morgan Stanley, HSBC u. a. (5 Banken; Deutsche Bank als Kronzeugin bußgeldfrei)CMA: GBP 104.46m fine for four banks over information exchange on gilts United KingdomCartels and collusion €126.2m

The CMA issued five separate decisions finding that, between 2009 and 2013, pairs of banks had exchanged competitively sensitive information on trading UK government bonds (gilts and gilt asset swaps), and in part on Debt Management Office auctions and Bank of England buy-back auctions, in bilateral Bloomberg chats between individual traders. Under settlement, Royal Bank of Canada pays 34,200,000, Morgan Stanley 29,700,000, HSBC 23,400,000 and Citi 17,160,000 GBP, GBP 104,460,000 in total; Deutsche Bank, which had reported the exchanges, was not fined.

What organisations can take from it

Chats between traders at different firms are a cartel risk: even occasional exchanges of pricing and auction information can amount to a restriction of competition by object.

Relevance to training and awareness

Information exchange between competitors in trader chats

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Chapter I prohibition, section 2(1) Competition Act 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Citi: 35% leniency discount and 20% settlement discount; HSBC, Morgan Stanley and RBC: 10% settlement discount. The CMA also took into account the time elapsed since the infringements ended and the banks' extensive compliance measures, some of which pre-dated the investigation.
Published
21 Feb 2025

Original amount 104,460,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 Feb 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.

19 Feb 2025 Smart Home Ensured LimitedICO: Enforcement notice against Smart Home Ensured over marketing calls United KingdomMarketing and consent Order

The ICO issued an enforcement notice to Smart Home Ensured Limited. The ICO found that between July and August 2023 the company made 14,508 unsolicited marketing calls to numbers that had been registered with the Telephone Preference Service for at least 28 days. The notice requires the company to stop such calls. The notice is an enforcement notice and does not impose a fine.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 21 PECR; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance

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 Feb 2025 Mako Financial Markets Partnership LLPFCA: £1.66m fine for Mako over control failings in OTC equity trading United KingdomInternal controls €2m

The FCA fined Mako Financial Markets Partnership LLP £1,662,700, of which £1,137,283 is disgorgement. The FCA found that between December 2013 and November 2015 Mako executed over-the-counter trades for clients introduced by another broker group, without adequate systems and controls against fraud and money laundering. Customer due diligence and transaction monitoring were, in the FCA's view, inadequate, and red flags in certain equity trades were missed. The fine includes a settlement discount.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
FCA Principles 2 und 3; section 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 1,662,700 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Feb 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.

4 Feb 2025 AG Communications LimitedAG Communications: £1,187,500 over AML, player protection and self-exclusion failings United KingdomInternal controls €1.43m

The online operator will pay £1,187,500 in lieu of a financial penalty under a settlement and contribute to the Commission's investigation costs. The settlement also includes a divestment of £220,334, which is not included in the amount shown. A compliance assessment found breaches between May 2023 and October 2024 of the anti-money laundering licence condition LC 12.1.1 para. 3 and of requirements on customer interaction, customer identification, information to customers, reporting of key events and display of rules; the self-exclusion requirements were breached from October 2022 to May 2024, so that, for example, one self-excluded customer was able to set up more than 100 accounts. The Commission had already announced a fine against the company in 2022.

What organisations can take from it

Self-exclusions and loss limits must be enforced as technically binding, not merely offered.

Relevance to training and awareness

Technical enforcement of self-exclusion and loss limits

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. 3, SRCP 3.4.3, SRCP 3.9.1, LC 4.2.1, LC 15.2.1, SRCP 4.2.6 und SRCP 3.5.3 der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Repeat case
yes
Mitigating circumstances
An action plan following the December 2023 assessment, full cooperation with regular updates, early acceptance of the failings and a voluntarily agreed external audit on anti-money laundering and safer gambling, including to improve internal training.
Published
4 Mar 2025

Original amount 1,187,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Feb 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.

4 Feb 2025 Glasgow City CouncilICO: Reprimand for Glasgow City Council over late subject access responses United KingdomData subject rights and transparency Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to Glasgow City Council. The ICO found that between April 2023 and March 2024 the council answered only 45% of subject access requests within the statutory deadline. The ICO found infringements of the requirements to respond on time.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3), 15(1) und 15(3) UK GDPR; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
10,000 or more

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 2025 City of Edinburgh CouncilICO: Reprimand for City of Edinburgh Council over late subject access responses United KingdomData subject rights and transparency Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to the City of Edinburgh Council. The ICO found that in 2023 the council failed to answer 40% of subject access requests within the one-month statutory deadline. The ICO found infringements of the requirements to respond on time.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3), 15(1) und 15(3) UK GDPR; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
10,000 or more

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.

27 Jan 2025 Infinox Capital LimitedFCA: £99,200 fine for Infinox over missing transaction reports United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €117,946

The FCA fined Infinox Capital Limited £99,200. The FCA found that between October 2022 and March 2023 the firm failed to report to the FCA trades from its single-stock CFD business routed through one corporate account. In total 46,053 transaction reports were missing and were only back-reported in December 2023. The fine includes a 30% settlement discount.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
Art. 26(1) UK MiFIR; section 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 99,200 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Jan 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.

24 Jan 2025 GoogleGoogle commits to the CMA to tougher action against fake reviews United KingdomFake 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.

What organisations can take from it

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

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.

10 Jan 2025 Markom Management LimitedOFSI: GBP 300,000 penalty for Markom Management over a refund to a designated person United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €358,453

On 10 January 2025 OFSI imposed a monetary penalty of GBP 300,000 on the UK company Markom Management Limited, which in 2018 provided fiduciary, administration and bookkeeping services to companies. According to OFSI's findings, on 20 February 2018 the company instructed the return of an overpayment of around GBP 416,590 to a person designated under EU law, thereby making funds directly available to that person. OFSI attributed this to a lack of processes, poor knowledge of sanctions and a wish to make the payment quickly. The company reported the breach in October 2018; OFSI did not grant a disclosure discount. The notice of intent of 1 August 2024 had proposed GBP 400,000; after representations from the company OFSI reduced the amount. A ministerial review upheld the penalty on 4 June 2025. The publication does not mention any pending review. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Imposition of monetary penalty: Markom Management Limited", 31 July 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/imposition-of-monetary-penalty-markom-management-limited. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Ukraine (European Union Financial Sanctions) (No. 2) Regulations 2014 (Umsetzung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 269/2014); Geldbuße nach s. 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Published
31 Jul 2025

Original amount 300,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Jan 2025.

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.

9 Jan 2025 Greentube Alderney LimitedGreentube Alderney: £977,887 over anti-money laundering and customer interaction failings United KingdomInternal controls €1.17m

The operator of admiralcasino.co.uk will pay £977,887 in lieu of a financial penalty under a settlement and contribute to the Commission's investigation costs. The settlement also includes a divestment of £22,113, which is not included in the amount shown. Between September 2022 and June 2023 it did not implement its money laundering controls effectively – a bank statement submitted as proof of address showing unusual transactions was only scrutinised four months later – and between December 2022 and June 2023 its customer interaction fell short of the requirements. The Commission had already accepted a regulatory settlement from the company in 2021.

What organisations can take from it

Documents received at account opening must be reviewed for money laundering risks immediately, not only when the next threshold is reached.

Relevance to training and awareness

Immediate review of customer documents for money laundering risks

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. 3 und SRCP 3.4.3 Abs. 1 und 8 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, full cooperation with information provided by agreed deadlines and early acceptance of the failings.
Published
9 Jan 2025

Original amount 977,887 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Jan 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.

9 Jan 2025 ein kleiner britischer BrokerFCA: small broker fined over cum-ex money laundering risks United KingdomInternal controls €344,791

From January to September 2015, the broker had no effective systems against financial crime and was therefore exposed to the risk of facilitating fraudulent trading and money laundering in connection with cum-ex trades. Following proceedings before the Upper Tribunal, the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) set the fine at £288,962.53 instead of the £744,745 originally intended.

What organisations can take from it

Even small brokers must question unusually lucrative, circular trading patterns before executing them.

Relevance to training and awareness

Recognising warning signs in unusual trading structures

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
FCA Principles 2 und 3 (PRIN 2, PRIN 3)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
reduced
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Employees
Under 50
Mitigating circumstances
Reduction by the Upper Tribunal
Published
10 Jan 2025

Original amount 288,962.53 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Jan 2025.

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.

9 Jan 2025 Liquipak LtdBleach into surface water drain: more than 800 dead fish – packing company convicted United KingdomWaste and hazardous substances €3,182

After a wooden pallet collapsed in 2021, sodium hypochlorite (bleach) ran into a manhole that the specialist packing company believed led to the foul sewer; in fact it discharged into the River Holme, and more than 800 fish died. Fine of 2,666.67 GBP after an early guilty plea, 8,973.67 GBP in total including costs and victim surcharge. According to its annual accounts, the business had an average of 25 employees.

What organisations can take from it

If you store chemicals, know where every drain leads – a drainage plan is basic equipment.

Relevance to training and awareness

Knowledge of site drainage and reporting of spills

Authority / court
Kirklees Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
Legal basis
Regulation 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Employees
Under 50
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Early guilty plea, full cooperation, clean-up and new storage and handling procedures
Published
24 Jan 2025

Original amount 2,666.67 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Jan 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.

13 Dec 2024 United Lincolnshire Teaching Hospitals NHS TrustICO: Reprimand for United Lincolnshire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust over late subject access responses United KingdomData subject rights and transparency Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to United Lincolnshire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. The ICO found that between March 2021 and March 2022 the trust failed to answer 32% of subject access requests within the one-month statutory deadline. The ICO found infringements of the requirements to respond on time.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3), 15(1) und 15(3) UK GDPR; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Healthcare
Employees
1,000 to 9,999

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.

5 Dec 2024 Anglian Water Services LimitedAnglian Water: 300,000 GBP for sewage discharge into protected Broads area United KingdomEmissions and permits €362,319

Because of a blockage caused by unflushable items, a pumping station in Ormesby St Margaret discharged untreated sewage in 2018 into Spring Dyke, which flows into a drinking water supply and nature conservation area; thousands of fish died. The court found the company negligent and imposed 300,000 GBP plus 21,896.56 GBP in costs. According to its 2025 annual report, the utility employed an average of 5,874 full-time equivalents.

What organisations can take from it

Fix known weaknesses at pumping stations without an emergency overflow permit before they lead to a discharge.

Authority / court
Basildon Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulation 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Culpability
negligent
Repeat case
yes
Published
6 Dec 2024

Original amount 300,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Dec 2024.

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.

5 Dec 2024 Betreiber von Kredit-Websites, UK (anonymisiert)ICO: £200,000 fine for a loan website operator over marketing texts United KingdomMarketing and consent €241,546

The ICO fined a small UK company operating loan websites £200,000 and issued an enforcement notice. According to the ICO, between September 2022 and December 2023, 37,977 complaints were received about marketing messages that it found were sent at the company's instigation without valid consent and in some cases without identifying the sender. Early payment reduces the penalty to £160,000.

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; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 200,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Dec 2024.

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.

5 Dec 2024 Breathe Services LtdICO: £170,000 fine for Breathe Services over millions of marketing calls with spoofed numbers United KingdomMarketing and consent €205,314

The ICO fined the Bolton-based debt advice company Breathe Services Ltd £170,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that in 2022 the company made more than 4.3 million marketing calls to numbers registered with the Telephone Preference Service, presenting over 1,000 different caller numbers to hide its identity. The ICO had searched its premises in 2023.

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; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 170,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Dec 2024.

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.

5 Dec 2024 Money Bubble LtdICO: £120,000 fine for Money Bubble over unwanted marketing calls United KingdomMarketing and consent €144,928

The ICO fined Money Bubble Ltd £120,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that in October and November 2022 the company made around 169,000 marketing calls to numbers registered with the Telephone Preference Service without being able to show consent; complaints were made to the ICO and the TPS. Early payment reduces the penalty to £96,000.

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; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 120,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Dec 2024.

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.

26 Nov 2024 Macquarie Bank Limited, London BranchMacquarie Bank London: 13 million GBP over control failures, more than 400 fictitious trades went undetected United KingdomOrganisational requirements €15.6m

According to the FCA's findings, more than 400 fictitious trades were booked and three key internal controls circumvented on the branch's metals and commodities desk between June 2020 and February 2022, so that losses remained concealed; the bank was partly aware of the weaknesses but did not remedy them in time. Unwinding the positions cost around 57.8 million USD; the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed a fine of around 13 million GBP on the bank.

What organisations can take from it

Close known control weaknesses in trading with a deadline and a responsible owner; otherwise individual misconduct becomes an organisational failure.

Relevance to training and awareness

Recognising and reporting circumvention of controls in trading

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
FCA Principles for Businesses, Principle 3 (Systeme und Kontrollen); s. 206 Financial Services and Markets Act 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Employees
10,000 or more

Original amount 13,031,400 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Nov 2024.

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.

25 Nov 2024 Barclays plcFCA: £30m fine for Barclays plc over undisclosed Qatari arrangements in 2008 United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €35.9m

The FCA fined Barclays plc £30 million. The FCA found that during its capital raisings in June and October 2008, Barclays entered into advisory agreements with a Qatari investor group whose fees were linked to their participation in the capital raisings. These fees and the link were not disclosed in announcements, prospectuses and a shareholder circular, which in the FCA's view made them misleading. The FCA found failures to take reasonable care over published information and breaches of the requirements for shareholder circulars. In relation to the October 2008 capital raising, it found that Barclays plc had acted recklessly and had not acted with integrity towards its shareholders (Listing Principle 3). Barclays plc had referred the decision notice of 23 September 2022 to the Upper Tribunal but withdrew the reference on 22 November 2024.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
LR 1.3.3R; LR 13.3.1R(3); Listing Principle 3; section 91 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 30,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Nov 2024.

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.

25 Nov 2024 Barclays Bank plcFCA: £10m fine for Barclays Bank plc over incomplete 2008 prospectuses United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €12m

The FCA fined Barclays Bank plc £10 million. The FCA found that, in connection with the October 2008 capital raising, the bank issued financial instruments whose prospectuses did not mention an advisory agreement with a Qatari investor group and the related fees, which in its view made them misleading. The FCA found a failure to take reasonable care over published information; a separate decision was issued against the parent Barclays plc. Barclays Bank plc had referred the decision notice of 23 September 2022 to the Upper Tribunal but withdrew the reference on 22 November 2024.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
Listing Rule 1.3.3R; section 91 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 10,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Nov 2024.

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.

22 Nov 2024 Viatris Inc.Viatris: 1.5 million GBP – key staff replaced despite hold-separate order United KingdomMerger control €1.8m

During the review of the sale of the European rights to the hormone products Duphaston and Femoston to Theramex, an Initial Enforcement Order was in force. Viatris replaced members of the UK management without the consent of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and subsequently failed to report the breach; the CMA imposed 1.5 million GBP.

What organisations can take from it

During a merger review, staffing decisions in the target business also require consent – and breaches must be reported immediately.

Relevance to training and awareness

Standstill and interim obligations in merger proceedings (management, HR)

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Enterprise Act 2002, s. 72(2) (Initial Enforcement Order), s. 94A
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more

Original amount 1,500,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Nov 2024.

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.

22 Nov 2024 Sunseeker International LimitedSunseeker: 240,000 GBP fine and confiscation over Myanmar teak without due diligence United KingdomSupply chain due diligence €368,909

Between April 2021 and July 2022, the yacht builder imported eleven consignments of timber from the EU, including teak from Myanmar, without being able to demonstrate that the risk of illegal logging was negligible; its due diligence system was not maintained and documents were missing. Following a guilty plea, the Bournemouth Crown Court imposed a fine of 240,000 GBP and a confiscation of 66,950.64 GBP (plus costs of 51,619.96 GBP).

What organisations can take from it

For timber from high-risk countries such as Myanmar, the risk can practically never be reduced to a negligible level – purchasing and design should switch to alternatives.

Relevance to training and awareness

Due diligence for high-risk timber (Myanmar teak)

Authority / court
Bournemouth Crown Court (Anklage: Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS), Department for Business and Trade)
Area of law
Supply chain and human rights · Supply chain due diligence
Legal basis
Timber and Timber Products (Placing on the Market) Regulations 2013, Regulations 4(b), 4(c), 4(d)/4(e); Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Original amount 306,950.64 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Nov 2024.

Sources

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.

22 Nov 2024 Bio Dynamic (UK) LimitedBiogas plant: tank explodes during angle grinding – 304,500 GBP after joint HSE/EA prosecution United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €365,964

In 2017 two employees were cutting pipes with an angle grinder on top of an eleven-metre-high slurry tank without fall protection; sparks ignited gases, the tank exploded, both were seriously injured and one had a leg amputated. There was no safe tank design, no risk assessments, no permit-to-work procedures, no training and no supervision, and the operator also breached its environmental permit; fines totalling 304,500 GBP plus 229,988 GBP in costs. The company is a micro-enterprise with fewer than 10 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Carry out hot work on plant containing flammable gases only with a permit to work, gas testing and fall protection – having a permit on paper does not protect against liability.

Relevance to training and awareness

Hot work and permit-to-work procedures in explosive atmospheres

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Nottingham Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency und Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 2(1) und 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974; Regulation 38(2) Environmental Permitting Regulations 2016; Section 33(1)(c) Environmental Protection Act 1990
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
Under 50
Published
28 Nov 2024

Original amount 304,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Nov 2024.

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.

22 Nov 2024 NOW: Pensions Limited und NOW: Pension Trustee LimitedPensions Regulator: £50,000 each for NOW: Pensions and its trustee over reporting failures United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligations €120,185

The Determinations Panel of The Pensions Regulator imposed penalties of 50,000 GBP each – the statutory maximum – on NOW: Pensions Limited (scheme funder and strategist) and NOW: Pension Trustee Limited (trustee) of the NOW: Pensions Trust master trust. Both had failed to report three series of undelivered statutory communications to members and potential members – according to TPR more than 80,000 communications about automatic enrolment rights – as significant events, and had failed to report two of them as breaches of law in time. It was the first enforcement action against an authorised master trust for reporting failures.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone who discovers system failures affecting statutory communications must report them to the regulator promptly as an event and as a breach of law – an internal review does not replace the report.

Relevance to training and awareness

Reporting system and process failures to the regulator

Authority / court
The Pensions Regulator (TPR), Determinations Panel
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
s. 10 Pensions Act 1995; s. 16 Pension Schemes Act 2017; s. 70 Pensions Act 2004; reg. 14 Occupational Pension Schemes (Master Trusts) Regulations 2018
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
Both firms admitted the breaches in a joint statement; the Panel made no finding of a deliberate attempt to conceal the failures; the penalties were paid in full.
Published
18 Jul 2025

Original amount 100,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Nov 2024.

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 Nov 2024 E.ON NextOfgem: E.ON Next pays GBP 14.5m over missing final bills for prepayment customers United KingdomConsumer protection and online retail €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.

What organisations can take from it

Billing errors for departing customers quickly add up to millions – final bills and credit refunds need automated controls.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

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 Nov 2024 Harvey Nichols and Company LtdHarvey Nichols: £175,701 fine for money laundering failings as a high value dealer United KingdomInternal controls €210,723

HMRC imposed a penalty of £175,701 under the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 on the company, which is supervised for anti-money laundering purposes as a high value dealer. The failings concerned risk assessment, policies, controls and procedures, staff training, due diligence and record keeping; no appeal was lodged.

What organisations can take from it

A business registered as a high value dealer needs risk assessment, training and customer checks just like a financial institution.

Relevance to training and awareness

Anti-money laundering duties for high value dealers

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
Reg. 18, 19, 24, 28, 35 und 40 Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Published
20 Nov 2024

Original amount 175,701 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Nov 2024.

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.

13 Nov 2024 Opus Energy LimitedOfgem: Opus Energy pays GBP 7.08m after overcharging business customers United KingdomConsumer protection and online retail €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.

What organisations can take from it

Billing systems need regular audits – small individual errors grow into millions over the years.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

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 Nov 2024 Metro Bank PlcFCA: £16.7m fine for Metro Bank over gaps in transaction monitoring United KingdomInternal controls €20.1m

The FCA fined Metro Bank Plc £16,675,200. The FCA found that between June 2016 and December 2020 a data error meant that more than 60 million transactions worth over £51 billion were not fed into the bank's automated anti-money laundering monitoring system. For a long time the bank did not check whether data reached the system completely. The fine includes a 30% settlement discount.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
FCA Principle 3; section 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 16,675,200 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Nov 2024.

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.

11 Nov 2024 Wessex Water Services LimitedWessex Water: 500,000 GBP after fish kills and late reporting United KingdomEmissions and permits €604,741

At Bowerhill Lodge pumping station (Melksham), technical failures in 2018 caused discharges into Clackers Brook lasting more than 54 hours, killing more than 2,100 fish; in addition, a rising main at Wick St Lawrence that was known to be critical but was not monitored burst. The court found the company negligent; the utility had also failed to report discharges immediately. It imposed 500,000 GBP plus 60,000 GBP in costs. According to its annual accounts (to June 2025), the utility employed an average of 2,890 people.

What organisations can take from it

Give assets you have identified as critical the monitoring you yourself consider necessary – and report incidents to the regulator immediately.

Authority / court
Swindon Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulation 12(1)(b), 38(1)(a) und 38(2) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Culpability
negligent
Published
11 Nov 2024

Original amount 500,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Nov 2024.

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.

11 Nov 2024 Herbert Smith Freehills CIS LLPOFSI: GBP 465,000 penalty for Moscow law firm entity Herbert Smith Freehills CIS over payments to designated banks United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €562,409

On 11 November 2024 OFSI imposed a monetary penalty of GBP 465,000 on Herbert Smith Freehills CIS LLP, the Moscow office of an international law firm; without the 50 per cent discount for voluntary disclosure it would have been GBP 930,000, according to OFSI. According to OFSI's findings, between 25 and 31 May 2022 the entity made six payments totalling GBP 3,932,392.10 to three designated Russian banks, partly in the course of closing the office. OFSI identified insufficient checks and a lack of sanctions screening of the payments, as well as haste in winding down, as causes. OFSI made no findings against the London parent. A ministerial review upheld the penalty on 14 February 2025, and on 14 March 2025 the London parent agreed to pay the penalty in full on the entity's behalf. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Imposition of monetary penalty: Herbert Smith Freehills CIS LLP Moscow", 20 March 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/penalty-notice-20-march-2025. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
regulation 12 of the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019; Geldbuße nach section 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Published
20 Mar 2025

Original amount 465,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Nov 2024.

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.

21 Oct 2024 Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) LimitedFCA: £5.4m fine for Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) over treatment of customers in financial difficulty United KingdomConsumer protection and online retail €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.

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.

14 Oct 2024 Southend-on-Sea City CouncilICO: Reprimand for Southend-on-Sea City Council over hidden staff data in FOI response United KingdomData breaches and data security Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to Southend-on-Sea City Council. The ICO found that in a Freedom of Information response published on a public platform in May 2023, a spreadsheet contained hidden personal data of current and former staff, including contact, pay and health details. The error was only noticed months later. The ICO found a breach of the requirement for appropriate data security.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(f) UK GDPR; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Sources

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.

9 Oct 2024 a UK retail bankFCA: £10.9m fine for UK retail bank over treatment of customers in arrears United KingdomConsumer protection and online retailanonymised €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.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Company name anonymised since 9 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

27 Sep 2024 a UK digital bankFCA: £29m fine for digital bank over financial crime controls United KingdomCustomer due diligenceanonymised €34.7m

The FCA fined a UK digital bank £28,959,426. The FCA found that the fast-growing bank's controls against money laundering and sanctions breaches did not keep pace with its growth. Although the bank agreed with the FCA in 2021 not to open accounts for high-risk customers, it opened 54,359 accounts for 49,183 such customers. In addition, screening of customers and payments against sanctions lists was inadequate between December 2019 and November 2023. The fine includes a 30% discount.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
FCA Principle 3; Verstoß gegen freiwillige Auflage (VREQ) nach FSMA 2000; section 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 28,959,426 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Sep 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 27 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

26 Sep 2024 a UK police serviceICO: £750,000 against a UK police service after spreadsheet error in FOI response United KingdomData breaches and data securityanonymised €898,979

In its response to a freedom of information request, a UK police service published an Excel file whose hidden worksheet contained the surnames, initials, rank and role of all its employees. The file was visible for just over two hours and was deleted after almost three hours; the police service assumed that it had fallen into the hands of militant groups.

What organisations can take from it

Before releasing any file, check for hidden sheets, metadata and raw data; a four-eyes approval process prevents such breaches.

Relevance to training and awareness

Checking files before publication (hidden worksheets)

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 Abs. 1 und 2
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
1,000 to 9,999
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Application of the public sector approach; without it, the fine would have been £5.6 million.
Published
3 Oct 2024

Original amount 750,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Sep 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 26 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

26 Sep 2024 a UK tax refund claims companyICO: £120,000 fine for tax refund claims firm over millions of marketing texts United KingdomMarketing and consentanonymised €143,837

The ICO fined the company £120,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that in 2023 the company sent around 7.9 million unlawful marketing texts within a few months, leading to over 66,000 complaints, most about the lack of an opt-out. According to the ICO, the contact data came from third-party suppliers that had not obtained valid consent.

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; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 120,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Sep 2024.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 26 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

25 Sep 2024 a French sugar group and its UK subsidiaryCMA: GBP 25,000 fine for sugar group over incomplete response in merger review United KingdomMerger controlanonymised €29,885

In the in-depth review of a merger with another sugar business, the group provided only part of the board minutes and internal governance documents requested under a formal notice under section 109 of the Enterprise Act 2002, because, in the CMA's view, it read the scope of the notice in an untenably narrow way. The CMA imposed a fine of GBP 25,000; the statutory maximum at the time was GBP 30,000.

What organisations can take from it

Answer information requests in merger control in full rather than on your own narrow reading – under the DMCCA the maximum penalty rises from GBP 30,000 to up to 1% of worldwide turnover.

Relevance to training and awareness

Responding fully to formal information requests from authorities

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
section 110 Enterprise Act 2002 (Nichtbefolgung eines Auskunftsverlangens nach section 109)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
26 Sep 2024

Original amount 25,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Sep 2024.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

20 Sep 2024 a British water and wastewater companyWater company: £1m enforcement undertaking over unlawful ash disposal United KingdomWaste and hazardous substancesanonymised €1.19m

Under an enforcement undertaking accepted by the Environment Agency, the water company pays £1,000,000 to a nature conservation charity and covers the agency's costs. Ash from two sludge-powered generators at the Beckton and Crossness treatment works had been disposed of without the relevant permit at a non-hazardous waste landfill in Essex between January 2014 and April 2016.

What organisations can take from it

Residues from a company's own plant must also be classified correctly and disposed of only through permitted routes.

Relevance to training and awareness

Waste classification and permitted disposal routes

Authority / court
Environment Agency
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
Legal basis
Reg. 38(1) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010/2016
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities

Original amount 1,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Sep 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 20 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

19 Sep 2024 a UK debt advice companyICO: £30,000 fine for debt advice firm over marketing texts United KingdomMarketing and consentanonymised €35,734

The ICO fined the company £30,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that between April and August 2023 the company sent around 130,000 unsolicited marketing texts, leading to more than 4,000 reports to the 7726 spam reporting service. Early payment reduces the penalty to £24,000.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 22 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 30,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Sep 2024.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 19 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

18 Sep 2024 a UK company making marketing callsICO: £80,000 fine for UK company over marketing calls United KingdomMarketing and consentanonymised €94,984

On 18 September 2024 the ICO fined the company £80,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that between 1 September 2022 and 31 May 2023 the company made 42,688 unsolicited marketing calls to numbers registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS).

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 21 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998 (Geldbuße); section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 80,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Sep 2024.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 18 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

2 Sep 2024 a UK online betting and gaming operatorICO: Reprimand for online gambling operator over advertising cookies without consent United KingdomCookies and trackinganonymised Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to a UK online betting and gaming operator (part of an international gambling group). The ICO found that between January and March 2023 the operator's website set third-party advertising cookies on arrival and thus processed visitors' personal data before they had consented. The ICO found processing without a lawful basis and without valid consent.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Cookies and tracking
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(a), 6(1)(a) und 7(1) UK GDPR; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 2 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

29 Aug 2024 a UK biomass power station operatorOfgem: power station operator pays GBP 25m over inaccurate biomass sourcing data United KingdomEnvironment and sustainabilityanonymised €29.7m

Ofgem found that the power station operator had submitted inaccurate annual profiling data on its biomass for the Renewables Obligation compliance period April 2021 to March 2022, in particular on forest type and sawlog content of Canadian consignments, and could not support these data because of inadequate data governance. The operator accepted the findings, is paying GBP 25m into the energy industry voluntary redress fund, is re-reporting the data and is commissioning an external audit of its supply chain data; Ofgem found no incorrect issue of subsidy certificates.

What organisations can take from it

Sustainability data reported to authorities needs the same data governance as financial figures – right down the supply chain.

Relevance to training and awareness

Data governance for sustainability and subsidy reporting

Authority / court
Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability
Legal basis
Renewables Obligation Order 2015 (Berichtspflichten zu jährlichen Profildaten)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Published
29 Aug 2024

Original amount 25,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Aug 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 29 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

29 Aug 2024 a UK concierge and property services companyOFSI: GBP 15,000 penalty for concierge services company over payments for a designated person's property United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoesanonymised €17,820

On 29 August 2024 OFSI imposed a monetary penalty of GBP 15,000 on a UK concierge and property services company. According to OFSI's findings, the small property management company made or received 26 payments totalling GBP 15,487.30 in 2022 and 2023 in connection with a property owned by a designated person, thereby dealing with frozen funds or making funds available for that person's benefit. Other payments were covered by a general licence, but the company failed to make the reports the licence required; OFSI treated this as a further breach and as an aggravating factor but did not impose a separate penalty for it. The company had not disclosed the breaches voluntarily. It made no representations and did not request a ministerial review. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
regulations 11(1) and 13(1) of the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019; Geldbuße nach section 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Published
26 Sep 2024

Original amount 15,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Aug 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 29 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

20 Aug 2024 a UK political partyICO: reprimand for political party over unanswered access and erasure requests United KingdomData subject rights and transparencyanonymised Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to a UK political party. According to the ICO's findings, the party built up a backlog of subject access requests after a cyber attack in October 2021, and a privacy mailbox that it had stopped monitoring in November 2021 was later found to contain many access and erasure requests with no evidence of a reply. Between November 2021 and November 2022 the ICO received 154 complaints about how the party handled access requests. The ICO found infringements of Articles 12(3), 15(1) and 17(1) UK GDPR; the party has since, among other steps, contacted all 646 people who had sent requests to the unmonitored mailbox. The reprimand itself is undated; the date follows the ICO case page.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3), 15(1) und 17(1) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 20 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

16 Aug 2024 a large audit firmFCA: £15m fine for audit firm over failure to report concerns at a minibond issuer United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligationsanonymised €17.6m

The FCA fined a large audit firm £15 million. The FCA found that, while auditing the 2016 accounts of a minibond issuer in autumn 2016, the audit firm encountered a lack of cooperation, aggressive behaviour and misleading information from the company. In the FCA's view, the audit firm should have reported to the FCA that this could be significant for supervision but did not. The issuer entered administration in 2019; investors had bought minibonds with a face value of around £237 million.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
section 345 FSMA 2000 (Pflichten von Abschlussprüfern gegenüber der FCA)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other

Original amount 15,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Aug 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 16 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

15 Aug 2024 a British beer importerBeer importer: £414,003.54 over breach of packaging rules United KingdomWaste and hazardous substancesanonymised €483,564

The beer importer paid £414,003.54 to an environmental charity under an enforcement undertaking and covered the agency's costs. Since 2004 the company had not registered as a packaging producer and had therefore not contributed to the recovery of its packaging waste. The amount corresponds to the costs avoided plus a 30 per cent surcharge.

What organisations can take from it

Importers should check whether they must register as packaging producers; ignorance does not prevent repayment plus a surcharge.

Relevance to training and awareness

Registration duties under extended producer responsibility for packaging

Authority / court
Environment Agency
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
Legal basis
Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Food and agriculture
Mitigating circumstances
The company said it had been unaware of the regulations, offered the payment itself and is now compliant.
Published
15 Aug 2024

Original amount 414,003.54 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Aug 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 15 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

15 Aug 2024 a UK windows and conservatories companyICO: GBP 40,000 fine for windows company over calls to TPS numbers United KingdomMarketing and consentanonymised €46,721

On 15 August 2024 the ICO fined a UK windows and conservatories company GBP 40,000 and served an enforcement notice on the same day. According to the ICO's findings, between 1 January and 1 June 2023 the company made 18,280 unsolicited marketing calls to lines that had been on the TPS or CTPS opt-out registers for at least 28 days, without the subscribers having agreed to such calls; eight complaints resulted. The ICO treated this as a breach of regulation 21(1)(b) of PECR. Under the notice, payment by 16 September 2024 reduced the fine to GBP 32,000.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 21(1)(b) PECR; section 55A DPA 1998 (Geldbuße); section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate

Original amount 40,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Aug 2024.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 15 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

13 Aug 2024 a UK company making marketing callsICO: £40,000 fine for UK company over marketing calls United KingdomMarketing and consentanonymised €46,807

The ICO fined the company £40,000 and issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that the company made 5,361 marketing calls to people whose numbers had been registered with the Telephone Preference Service for at least 28 days. Early payment reduces the penalty to £32,000.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 21 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other

Original amount 40,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Aug 2024.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 13 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

9 Aug 2024 a Cypriot CFD providerFCA: £276,100 fine for Cypriot CFD provider over unfair treatment of CFD customers United KingdomConsumer protection and online retailanonymised €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.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 9 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

9 Aug 2024 a UK boiler manufacturerCMA: boiler manufacturer changes marketing of hydrogen-blend-ready boilers United KingdomMisleading environmental and sustainability claimsanonymised Other

The CMA was concerned that the manufacturer, by promoting the ability of its gas boilers to run on a blend of up to 20% hydrogen, gave the impression of an environmental benefit or of future-proofing consumers' heating. The company gave formal undertakings to change or remove such marketing claims, inform its installers and retailers and report to the CMA on compliance; it did not admit any breach of the law.

What organisations can take from it

Environmental claims must reflect the actual benefit to consumers today – a technical option is not yet a climate benefit.

Relevance to training and awareness

Environmental marketing claims (greenwashing)

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
Legal basis
Part 8 Enterprise Act 2002 (Undertakings nach section 219); Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Published
9 Aug 2024
Sources

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 9 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

6 Aug 2024 a UK audit firmFCA: Public censure for audit firm over deficient client assets reports United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligationsanonymised Reprimand or warning

The FCA published a censure of a UK audit firm. The FCA found that, as external auditor of a regulated firm, between July 2015 and May 2019 it failed to prepare four client assets reports properly and did not report to the FCA a total of 25 breaches of the client assets rules (CASS) by that client. The FCA stressed that it relies on these reports for its supervision.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
SUP 3.10.4A R(1); section 345 FSMA 2000
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 6 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

2 Aug 2024 a UK asset managerFCA: Public censure for asset manager over risky illiquid fund investments United KingdomOrganisational requirementsanonymised Reprimand or warning

The FCA publicly censured a UK asset manager. The FCA found that, as manager of several French UCITS funds, between April 2015 and November 2019 the company invested in mostly unlisted, hard-to-sell assets without adequate due diligence, risk management and conflicts management; its trading records were also deficient and it did not deal with the FCA in an open and cooperative way. Under the settlement the group secured EUR 250 million for affected unitholders, waived fees and investments of EUR 320 million and agreed to give up its UK permissions.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
FCA Principles 2, 3 und 11; section 205 FSMA 2000
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 2 Aug 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

23 Jul 2024 a UK e-money institutionFCA: £3.5m fine for crypto exchange subsidiary over onboarding high-risk customers United KingdomInternal controlsanonymised €4.17m

The FCA fined a UK e-money institution belonging to a US crypto exchange group, £3,503,546. The FCA found that the firm had voluntarily agreed with the FCA not to onboard high-risk customers, but between October 2020 and October 2023 it repeatedly breached this and served 13,416 such customers. In the FCA's view, the cause was poorly designed, tested and monitored controls. The fine includes a 30% settlement discount.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
Legal basis
Regulation 51(1)(a) Electronic Money Regulations 2011; FCA Principle 2
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 3,503,546 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Jul 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 23 Jul 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

22 Jul 2024 an academy school in EssexICO: reprimand for school over facial recognition without an impact assessment United KingdomData protectionanonymised Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to an academy in Essex with around 1,200 pupils aged 11 to 18. According to the ICO's findings, the school introduced facial recognition for cashless catering in March 2023 without first carrying out the required data protection impact assessment, which was only completed in November 2023. Until then it assumed consent unless parents had opted their children out, which in the ICO's view is not valid consent, and it did not seek advice from its data protection officer. The reprimand is based on an infringement of Article 35(1) UK GDPR. The reprimand is undated; the date follows the ICO case page.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection
Legal basis
Art. 35(1) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 22 Jul 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

15 Jul 2024 a UK online voucher platformCMA: voucher platform changes countdown marketing and refunds over GBP 4m United KingdomMisleading advertising and pricinganonymised 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.

What organisations can take from it

Countdown timers and scarcity claims must reflect reality, and paid memberships require active consent.

Relevance to training and awareness

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
Sources

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 15 Jul 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

5 Jul 2024 a London borough councilICO: reprimand for London borough council after a ransomware attack United KingdomSecurity measures and risk managementanonymised Reprimand or warning

On 5 July 2024 the ICO issued an (updated) reprimand to a London borough council. According to the reprimand, it followed a ransomware attack that the council became aware of on 11 October 2020: the attacker was able to access and encrypt 440,000 files containing personal data, including special category data, relating to at least 280,000 residents and other people, including staff. According to the ICO's findings, patch management and user account management were inadequate, in breach of Articles 5(1)(f) and 32(1)(b) UK GDPR. The ICO had initially considered a fine but, taking into account its approach to the public sector and the circumstances of the case, decided on a reprimand.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(f) und 32(1)(b) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 5 Jul 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

21 Jun 2024 a UK law firmICO: reprimand for law firm after a data leak without multi-factor authentication United KingdomSecurity measures and risk managementanonymised Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to a law firm specialising in criminal and military law. According to the ICO's findings, an unknown attacker used valid credentials to get into the firm's cloud server and later published data on the dark web. The incident affected 8,234 people in the UK, 863 of them at high risk because criminal proceedings data was involved. The ICO criticised the lack of multi-factor authentication and of a password policy for the compromised administrator account, and the fact that the firm had not checked since 2012 whether the security measures in its contract with its outsourced IT provider were adequate. It found infringements of Articles 32(1)(b) and 32(1)(d) UK GDPR. The reprimand is undated; the date follows the ICO case page.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
Legal basis
Art. 32(1)(b) und 32(1)(d) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 21 Jun 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

14 Jun 2024 a UK financial services firmFCA halts UK financial services firm after missing transaction reports United KingdomDisclosure and reporting obligationsanonymised Order

The FCA required the firm to cease all regulated activities immediately, to inform its clients and to preserve all records. Since April 2023 the firm had repeatedly failed to report all executed transactions under Art. 26(1) UK MiFIR, had in the FCA's assessment given it incomplete or inaccurate information, had not submitted audited accounts and had not notified a pending strike-off from the register of companies.

What organisations can take from it

Transaction reporting is no formality: a firm that persistently fails to report and keeps the regulator poorly informed effectively loses its permission to do business.

Relevance to training and awareness

Transaction reporting under UK MiFIR

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
s. 55L(3)(a) und (b) FSMA 2000; Art. 26(1) UK MiFIR; Principle 11 der FCA Principles for Businesses; SUP 16.7A.3R; SUP 15.3.21R
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Sources

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 14 Jun 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

10 Jun 2024 a British furniture retailerBritish furniture retailer: notice of remedial action – timber imported without due diligence United KingdomSupply chain due diligenceanonymised Order

As operator, the company placed furniture made of Vietnamese rubberwood from Malaysia on the market without exercising due diligence to reduce the risk of illegally harvested timber in the supply chain to a negligible level. The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) issued a Notice of Remedial Action under Regulation 11 of the Timber Regulations 2013.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone placing timber or timber products on the market for the first time must check and document origin and legality – including for supplies from neighbouring countries.

Relevance to training and awareness

Due diligence in timber purchasing (origin, legality of harvest, risk mitigation)

Authority / court
Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS), Department for Business and Trade
Area of law
Supply chain and human rights · Supply chain due diligence
Legal basis
Timber and Timber Products (Placing on the Market) Regulations 2013, Regulation 4(b) (Sorgfaltspflicht nach Verordnung (EU) Nr. 995/2010 in der im UK fortgeltenden Fassung)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 10 Jun 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

6 Jun 2024 a British timber importer in the construction sectorBritish timber importer: notice of remedial action – timber imported without due diligence United KingdomSupply chain due diligenceanonymised Order

As operator, the company placed pine plywood from Russia on the market without exercising due diligence to reduce the risk of illegally harvested timber in the supply chain to a negligible level. The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) issued a Notice of Remedial Action under Regulation 11 of the Timber Regulations 2013.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone placing timber or timber products on the market for the first time must check and document origin and legality – including for supplies from neighbouring countries.

Relevance to training and awareness

Due diligence in timber purchasing (origin, legality of harvest, risk mitigation)

Authority / court
Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS), Department for Business and Trade
Area of law
Supply chain and human rights · Supply chain due diligence
Legal basis
Timber and Timber Products (Placing on the Market) Regulations 2013, Regulation 4(b) (Sorgfaltspflicht nach Verordnung (EU) Nr. 995/2010 in der im UK fortgeltenden Fassung)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 6 Jun 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

4 Jun 2024 a British furniture retailerBritish furniture retailer: notice of remedial action – timber imported without due diligence United KingdomSupply chain due diligenceanonymised Order

As operator, the company placed wooden furniture from Vietnam on the market without exercising due diligence to reduce the risk of illegally harvested timber in the supply chain to a negligible level. The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) issued a Notice of Remedial Action under Regulation 11 of the Timber Regulations 2013.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone placing timber or timber products on the market for the first time must check and document origin and legality – including for supplies from neighbouring countries.

Relevance to training and awareness

Due diligence in timber purchasing (origin, legality of harvest, risk mitigation)

Authority / court
Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS), Department for Business and Trade
Area of law
Supply chain and human rights · Supply chain due diligence
Legal basis
Timber and Timber Products (Placing on the Market) Regulations 2013, Regulation 4(b) (Sorgfaltspflicht nach Verordnung (EU) Nr. 995/2010 in der im UK fortgeltenden Fassung)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 4 Jun 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

30 May 2024 a purchasing company of a major international furniture retailerPurchasing company: furniture seized – timber origin not sufficiently checked United KingdomSupply chain due diligenceanonymised Other

In April 2024, the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) seized furniture from several product ranges because the purchasing company, as operator, could not demonstrate due diligence that sufficiently mitigated the risk of illegal timber. Following a second notice dated 30 May 2024, the company had to donate the goods to a named charity.

What organisations can take from it

Even large retailers with their own sustainability programmes must be able to prove due diligence for each product and consignment – otherwise the goods may be seized.

Relevance to training and awareness

Proof of timber origin in purchasing

Authority / court
Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS), Department for Business and Trade
Area of law
Supply chain and human rights · Supply chain due diligence
Legal basis
Timber and Timber Products (Placing on the Market) Regulations 2013, Regulation 4(a), Regulation 9 (Beschlagnahme)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Employees
10,000 or more
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 30 May 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

29 May 2024 a British furniture retailerBritish furniture retailer: notice of remedial action – timber imported without due diligence United KingdomSupply chain due diligenceanonymised Order

As operator, the company placed furniture from Vietnam on the market without exercising due diligence to reduce the risk of illegally harvested timber in the supply chain to a negligible level. The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) issued a Notice of Remedial Action under Regulation 11 of the Timber Regulations 2013.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone placing timber or timber products on the market for the first time must check and document origin and legality – including for supplies from neighbouring countries.

Relevance to training and awareness

Due diligence in timber purchasing (origin, legality of harvest, risk mitigation)

Authority / court
Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS), Department for Business and Trade
Area of law
Supply chain and human rights · Supply chain due diligence
Legal basis
Timber and Timber Products (Placing on the Market) Regulations 2013, Regulation 4(b) (Sorgfaltspflicht nach Verordnung (EU) Nr. 995/2010 in der im UK fortgeltenden Fassung)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 29 May 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

28 May 2024 a Scottish offshore wind farm companyOfgem: offshore wind farm pays GBP 33.14m over excessive constraint bids United KingdomAbuse of market poweranonymised €39m

The operator of the offshore wind farm accepted that it had breached the Transmission Constraint Licence Condition by charging excessive prices in the balancing mechanism to reduce its output during grid constraints, thereby pushing up costs for consumers. Instead of a formal investigation, it paid GBP 33.14m into Ofgem's redress fund and changed its bid pricing policy; in its own view the breach was unintentional.

What organisations can take from it

A generator facing little competition during grid constraints must not exploit this with excessive prices – and must review and document the compliance of its bids.

Relevance to training and awareness

Pricing when holding market power in constraint situations

Authority / court
Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Condition 20A Electricity Generation Standard Licence Conditions (Transmission Constraint Licence Condition)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Admission, full cooperation and immediate change to its bid pricing policy; closed without a formal investigation.
Published
28 May 2024

Original amount 33,140,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 May 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 28 May 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

24 May 2024 a UK broker of emergency property loans and a property purchasing companyHigh Court: restitution orders against two firms over unauthorised financial business United KingdomCapital markets and financial supervisionanonymised Order

In proceedings brought by the FCA, the High Court found that a loan broker arranged mortgage loans for homeowners in financial difficulty without authorisation and that a property purchasing company bought their properties and rented them back to them without authorisation. The court ruled on relief for 45 affected individuals from the first judgment of 2022 and 26 further individuals: it made restitution orders for the losses suffered, against the purchasing company in the sale-and-rent-back cases, and required the broker to remove land registry restrictions it had used to extract excessive fees. The companies' share of the payments ordered is not stated here as a separate amount. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

What organisations can take from it

Arranging loans, or buying and renting back homes from owners in distress, requires authorisation – otherwise unwinding and compensation for all losses follow.

Authority / court
High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts (Klage: Financial Conduct Authority (FCA))
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision
Legal basis
ss. 19, 21, 380 und 382 FSMA 2000
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not set out here.
Published
5 Aug 2024
Sources

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 24 May 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

23 May 2024 a major UK bankFCA: £6.3m fine for major UK bank over treatment of customers in financial difficulty United KingdomConsumer protection and online retailanonymised €7.37m

The FCA fined a major UK bank £6,280,100. The FCA found that between June 2017 and October 2018 the bank did not treat customers in arrears or financial difficulty fairly: payment arrangements were agreed without proper affordability checks and forbearance was not always applied. At least 1.5 million customers across mortgages, loans, credit cards and overdrafts were affected; the bank has paid around £185 million in redress. 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; CONC 7.2.1R, 7.3.4R, 7.3.14R; MCOB 13.3.2A
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 6,280,100 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 May 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 23 May 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

17 May 2024 a London-based investment bankFCA: £27.8m fine for investment bank over trading control failures United KingdomOrganisational requirementsanonymised €32.4m

The FCA fined a London-based investment bank £27,766,200. The FCA found that a trader entered an erroneous basket order and overrode the warnings; because of inadequate trading controls, erroneous orders with a notional value of USD 196 billion were generated in the electronic trading system, of which USD 1.4 billion of sell orders were executed on European venues. The FCA criticised ineffective pre-trade and post-trade controls. The fine includes a 30% discount.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
FCA Principles 2 und 3; MAR 7A.3.2R; section 206 FSMA 2000
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Original amount 27,766,200 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 May 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 17 May 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

9 May 2024 a UK public bodyICO: reprimand for UK public body after an attack on its email server United KingdomSecurity measures and risk managementanonymised Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to a UK public body. According to the ICO's findings, unknown attackers got into the body's on-premises email server from 24 August 2021 via a chain of known vulnerabilities; the data affected came mainly from the electoral register, with the names and home addresses of around 40 million people. The security patches for these vulnerabilities had been released in April and May 2021 but had not been applied. In addition, an audit found that 178 active accounts could be cracked quickly because their passwords were identical or similar to the initial passwords issued by the service desk. The ICO found infringements of Articles 5(1)(f) and 32(1)(b) UK GDPR. The reprimand is undated; the date follows the ICO case page.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(f) und 32(1)(b) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 9 May 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

18 Apr 2024 a UK charityICO: enforcement notice against charity over 461,650 marketing texts without consent United KingdomMarketing and consentanonymised Order

The ICO served an enforcement notice on a UK charity. According to the ICO's findings, between 22 April and 1 May 2022 subscribers received a total of 461,650 direct marketing text messages sent or instigated by the charity without valid consent; in the ICO's view the soft opt-in does not apply to charity fundraising. The ICO treated this as a breach of regulation 22 of PECR. The notice is dated 18 April 2024, whereas the ICO enforcement list shows the case under 1 March 2024.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulation 22 PECR; section 40 DPA 1998 (Enforcement Notice)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 18 Apr 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

11 Apr 2024 a UK authorised fund managerFCA: fund management company required to pay around £298m to fund investors United KingdomOrganisational requirementsanonymised Order

The FCA required a UK authorised fund manager to pay restitution of up to £298,403,919 to a suspended UK equity income fund for the benefit of investors. The FCA found that, as the fund's authorised corporate director, the firm failed between July 2018 and the fund's suspension in June 2019 to monitor liquidity adequately and to supervise the investment manager properly, disadvantaging investors who did not redeem in time. The FCA did not impose a fine, which it said would otherwise have been £50 million, because payment is made through a court-approved scheme of arrangement.

Authority / court
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
Legal basis
FCA Principles 2 und 6; section 384(1) FSMA 2000 (Restitution)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 11 Apr 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

9 Apr 2024 a Scottish charitable social landlordICO: reprimand for housing association over a faulty tenant portal United KingdomData breaches and data securityanonymised Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to a Scottish charitable social landlord with around 4,700 properties. According to the ICO's findings, a new customer portal went live on 14 July 2022 with a configuration error that gave residents with an ongoing anti-social behaviour case access to other residents' documents. 139 people were affected, 62 of whom the association considered at high risk; the data remained visible for five days because a first report from a resident was not escalated. According to the association, testing before launch had only checked functionality, not data protection. The ICO found this breached Article 5(1)(f) UK GDPR. The reprimand is undated; the date follows the ICO case page.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(f) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 9 Apr 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

4 Apr 2024 two online licensees of a British betting groupBetting group: £582,120 – including no sanctions screening before first deposit United KingdomCustomer due diligenceanonymised €678,556

The two online licensees of a betting group will pay a total of £582,120, directed to socially responsible causes, under a settlement (the gaming company £343,035, the sports betting company £239,085). An assessment in March 2022 found ineffective triggers for enhanced due diligence and know-your-customer checks, no screening of new customers against financial sanctions lists before their first deposit, over-reliance on customers' annual self-verification and customer interactions that were not tailored to the individual and of limited effect. For the customers reviewed, the Commission found no evidence of criminal funds or of funds from sanctioned persons; each company also pays £15,684.50 towards the Commission's investigation costs.

What organisations can take from it

New customers must be screened against financial sanctions lists before their first deposit.

Relevance to training and awareness

Sanctions screening of new customers and independent verification of KYC information

Authority / court
Gambling Commission
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
s. 116 Gambling Act 2005; LC 12.1.1 Abs. 2, LC 12.1.2 (nur Hillside (UK Gaming) ENC) und SRCP 3.4.1 Abs. 1b und 1c der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP); Reg. 28(11)(a) und 33 Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Mitigating circumstances
The extent of the remedial steps taken and timely cooperation with the investigation.
Published
4 Apr 2024

Original amount 582,120 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Apr 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 4 Apr 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

27 Mar 2024 three British fashion retailersCMA: three fashion retailers commit to clear environmental claims United KingdomMisleading environmental and sustainability claimsanonymised Other

Following an investigation into their fashion environmental claims, the three retailers gave formal undertakings to the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA): no vague terms such as ‘eco’ or ‘responsible’, clear information on recycled and organic content, transparent criteria for green ranges, correct filters and information on labels, and regular reports to the CMA. No breach of law was established.

What organisations can take from it

Sustainability labels in online shops must be specific, verifiable and easy for customers to understand; blanket terms are not sufficient.

Relevance to training and awareness

Wording of environmental claims in marketing and online shops

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
Legal basis
Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (förmliche Verpflichtungszusagen)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Published
27 Mar 2024
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 27 Mar 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

25 Mar 2024 an English NHS university hospital trustICO: reprimand for NHS hospital trust over late subject access responses United KingdomData subject rights and transparencyanonymised Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to an English NHS university hospital trust. According to the ICO's findings, the hospital answered only 59% of subject access requests on time between 1 August 2022 and 1 July 2023, and 621 requests were still outstanding on 30 January 2024. Until January 2021 requests had been handled in alphabetical order, and the trust extended deadlines across the board without telling the people concerned. The ICO found infringements of Articles 12(3), 15(1) and 15(3) UK GDPR. The date follows from the six-month deadline to 25 September 2024 set in the reprimand and matches the ICO case page.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3), 15(1) und 15(3) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Healthcare
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 25 Mar 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

18 Mar 2024 a council-owned children's services company in EnglandICO: reprimand for children's services company over a disclosure in a child protection plan United KingdomData breaches and data securityanonymised Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to a children's services company owned by an English city council but operating independently of it. According to the ICO's findings, on 10 November 2022 the trust sent a family a child protection plan that wrongly included information about another person, including a child's data and criminal offence data. Among other things, the ICO criticised the trust for being unable to show clear, role-specific procedures or policies explaining how staff in the department concerned should apply data protection in practice. It found infringements of Articles 5(1)(f), 32(1)(b) and 32(2) UK GDPR. The reprimand is undated; the date follows the ICO case page.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
Art. 5(1)(f), 32(1)(b) und 32(2) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Sources

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 18 Mar 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

Load 20 more of 150

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