Initially, the FCA rejected the complaint as time barred but the Complaints Commissioner, which adjudicates on complaints about the FCA, ruled that the register must be kept correct regardless of the time since errors were spotted.

A complainant made two complaints to the Commissioner that the FCA had not dealt with their original complaints properly. 

The Complaints Commissioner upheld one of the complaints from the unidentified complainant related to a error on the FCA Register.

The complainant said they believed the error - suggesting they had worked for a company they had never been employed by - was stopping them from getting another job in financial services.

Complaints Commissioner Rachel Kent said, in her adjudication published this week, said: “I uphold Element Two of your complaint as the FCA did not address your assertion that the Register contains factually incorrect information. I recommended that this is investigated and resolved by the FCA to ensure the information on the Register is correct. In its response to the Preliminary Report, the FCA confirmed the steps you need to take in relation to this issue.”

Responding to the adjudication, the FCA said in a statement: “We accept this recommendation and provided our response to the Commissioner following their Preliminary Report. We will now write to the complainant to explain the steps they need to take.”

The complainant said originally that they were unhappy with an FCA decision not to investigate their complaints on the basis they were “out of time” – beyond a standard 12 month time limit for complaints.

The complaint was about the FCA rejecting the complainant’s application to become a CF30 adviser (a regulated customer function under which individuals are permitted to give advice on regulated investments and financial products), in 2017 because it was alleged that the complainant did not disclose a matter on their application they were expected to disclose.

The FCA decided it could not investigate the complaint as, “the circumstances giving rise to [it] would appear to be matters you were first aware of in 2017, yet this complaint was not submitted until more than 12 months later.”

The complainant said they were not aware of the time limit and alleged there had been a “miscarriage of regulation.”

The complainant wanted the FCA to remove the “negative mark” on their record to enable them to work in the industry again. This was Element One of the complaint to the Commissioner.

The complainant was also concerned that the FCA did not comment on the request to remove from the Register a link to a company the complainant said they had never worked for. This was Element Two of the complaint.

The Commissioner’s Report said Element One of the complaint stemmed from events that took place between 2005 and 2017 so it was ruled out of time.

Element Two, the register complaint, related to a company the complainant had never worked for. The FCA did not respond initially to this part of the complaint.

The Commissioner said complaints about errors on the register cannot be out of time and, “the Register needs to be accurate to serve its purpose, therefore this concern should have been referred to the relevant team within the FCA to investigate and resolve as appropriate and addressed in the Decision Letter.” The Commissioner told the FCA to address the matter as soon as possible which it has agreed to do.

In its response the FCA said the application by the complainant to become a CF30 at a firm was approved on 24 November 2017 however the firm was acquired by another firm in 2019 and later that year became a different firm. Just over a month after the name changed, the complainant’s CF30 function with the firm was ended and the Register was updated accordingly.

The FCA says it will update and correct the register once the complainant has provided confirmation of their dates of employment with the firm listed on the register.