What happened?
TCC Group’s Strategic Regulatory Director, Jason Wintie, recently featured in Money Marketing discussing the FCA’s evolving stance on ongoing advice. While many firms expected widespread criticism and significant remediation following the regulator’s review, the FCA’s findings were more measured. The review found that 83% of ongoing advice reviews had been delivered, with a further 15% impacted by client disengagement rather than firm failings. Only 2% of cases showed no evidence of firms attempting to deliver the promised service.
Jason highlights that although the FCA’s tone appears less punitive than many anticipated, firms should not mistake this for reduced regulatory scrutiny. The regulator continues to expect evidence of proactive service delivery, fair value and effective oversight.
Why does it matter?
The FCA’s feedback provides reassurance that most firms are meeting their ongoing advice obligations, but it also signals a shift in how compliance will be assessed. Rather than focusing solely on whether a review took place, firms increasingly need to demonstrate the value delivered to clients and evidence their efforts where engagement proves challenging.
For wealth managers and advisers, this means ongoing advice remains firmly on the regulator’s agenda. Future reviews, continued data collection and wider regulatory reform could create further scrutiny, making robust governance, oversight and customer outcome evidence more important than ever.
Supporting sources
Frequently asked questions
Has the FCA reduced its focus on ongoing advice?
No. While the FCA’s messaging was less severe than many anticipated, it has made clear that ongoing advice remains an area of regulatory interest, with further reviews and data collection continuing.
What did the FCA's review find?
The regulator found that 83% of ongoing advice reviews had been delivered, while 15% were affected by client disengagement. Only 2% showed no evidence of firms attempting to provide the agreed service.
What should firms focus on now?
Firms should focus on evidencing fair value, demonstrating proactive engagement with clients, and maintaining strong governance and oversight frameworks that can withstand future regulatory scrutiny.
- FCA remuneration reform explained: what CP26/27 could mean for firmsAnalysis & Perspectives · September 2, 2026
- IBS Intelligence: Why financial services firms face growing AI governance scrutinyAnalysis & Perspectives · September 2, 2026
- FCA CP26/28: What the AIFM regime reforms mean for wealth managers and firmsRegulatory Horizon · September 2, 2026
- Will Value for Money assessments change how advisers compare pension providers?Regulatory Horizon · September 2, 2026
Reviewed by TCC Group Editorial Team