• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Gowling WLG
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • Cookie Policy
  • Home
  • About
  • Posts
  • Blogs
    • The IP Blog
    • Public Law & Regulation
    • AI
    • The Unified Patents Court

LoupedIn

October 22, 2026, Eu King Tan

FCA publishes good and poor practice on AI in financial services

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

On 19 October 2026, the FCA published examples of good and poor practice on the use of AI in financial services.  Jessica Rusu, the FCA’s chief data, information and intelligence officer, set out the findings the same day in a speech. The examples come from industry engagement, supervisory work and the FCA’s AI Lab initiatives.  They do not create new requirements.  Instead, the FCA confirms that existing frameworks, including the Consumer Duty, the Senior Managers and Certification Regime and the SYSC rules, already apply to firms’ use of AI.

The publication comes as adoption accelerates, with a forthcoming joint FCA and Bank of England survey showing that 86% of firms now use AI.  Ms Rusu also highlighted that consumers are increasingly turning to general-purpose large language models for financial information, yet only 40% recognise there is no recourse if something goes wrong after acting on that advice. The FCA is calling on AI providers to give clear, proportionate and consistent disclaimers.  Key themes include:

  • Consumers. Firms should define the consumer need before deploying AI and test outcomes across different consumer characteristics. They should also avoid excluding vulnerable consumers by default.  Firms should explain the role and limits of AI to consumers and not overstate what it can do. 
  • Accountability. Senior managers should own AI risks from the design stage onwards.  Governance should not be retrofitted after deployment. The FCA also warns against human review becoming a “box-ticking” exercise rather than meaningful oversight.
  • Resilience. Firms should stress-test AI systems, plan for failure and understand their dependencies, including reliance on a single model. Firms remain responsible for outsourced AI services and should not rely on untested vendor assurances.

Looking ahead, Ms Rusu said that incident reporting must extend to significant AI failures and near-misses, and that agentic systems require continuous, conditional assurance.   The FCA will update the guidance as the technology evolves.  It will also work with industry, other regulators and frontier labs to develop a trusted framework for agentic finance.

About the author(s)

Eu King Tan
Trainee Solicitor | See recent postsBlog biography

Eu King is a Trainee Solicitor in the Financial Services and Capital Markets at Gowling WLG.

He supports the team on a range of financial regulatory and capital markets matters, including advising firms on their regulatory obligations and assisting on transactional work.

    Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Agentic AI, AI, Consumer Duty, Consumer Protection, FCA, Financial Regulation, financial services, Governance and Accountability, Incident Reporting, Large Language Models (LLMs), Operational Resilience, Outsourcing and Third-Party Risk, SM&CR, SYSC, Vulnerable Customers

    Views expressed in this blog do not necessarily reflect those of Gowling WLG.

    NOT LEGAL ADVICE. Information made available on this website in any form is for information purposes only. It is not, and should not be taken as, legal advice. You should not rely on, or take or fail to take any action based upon this information. Never disregard professional legal advice or delay in seeking legal advice because of something you have read on this website. Gowling WLG professionals will be pleased to discuss resolutions to specific legal concerns you may have.

    Primary Sidebar

    Recent Posts

    • FCA publishes good and poor practice on AI in financial services
    • House of Lords Committee Opens Inquiry into Financial Services Regulatory Sandboxes
    • FCA publishes final report on distribution of pure protection products

    Tags

    Artificial Intelligence (AI) (69) Autonomous vehicles (11) b2022 (19) Birmingham 2022 (8) Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games (15) Brexit (23) Climate change (18) COP26 (11) Copyright (11) COVID-19 (23) Cyber security (8) Data protection (8) Defined contribution (8) Dispute Resolution (15) Employment (19) employment law (18) Environment (19) Environmental Societal Governance (9) ESG (56) ESG and pensions (13) financial services (10) General Election 2024 and pensions (8) Government (7) Intellectual Property (91) IP (13) Life sciences (9) litigation funding (9) Patents (41) Pensions (55) Pension Schemes Act 2021 (11) Pensions dashboards (7) Pensions in 2022 (10) Pensions law (45) Procurement (7) Public Law & Regulation (39) Real Estate (30) Retail (8) sustainability (22) Tech (59) The Week In Pensions (11) Trademarks (16) UK (15) unified patents court (9) UPC (40) Week in HR (8)

    Categories

    Archives

    Gowling WLG is an international law firm comprising the members of Gowling WLG International Limited, an English Company Limited by Guarantee, and their respective affiliates. Each member and affiliate is an autonomous and independent entity. Gowling WLG International Limited promotes, facilitates and co-ordinates the activities of its members but does not itself provide services to clients. Our structure is explained in more detail on our Legal Information page.

    Footer

    • Home
    • About
    • Gowling WLG
    • Legal information
    • Privacy statement
    • Cookie Policy

    © 2026 Gowling WLG