FCA Supervision & Remediation
Support with FCA information requests, supervisory correspondence, Dear CEO letter responses, skilled person reviews and regulatory remediation programmes.
Speak to a licensing expertSpeak to a licensing expert
Tell us the business, the markets and your timing. Every enquiry is answered the same business day, with a written proposal: the licence, the requirements, the cost and the timeline.
Your enquiry
What we do
FCA supervisory contact is rarely random. An information request, a Dear CEO letter follow-up or a request for a skilled person review reflects a view the regulator has already begun to form. How a firm responds materially affects what happens next.
The most damaging responses are not dishonest ones. They are responses that are late, incomplete, internally inconsistent or that assert control without producing evidence. Once the FCA doubts the reliability of a firm's own account, the intensity of supervision increases and the firm loses the ability to lead its own remediation.
We help management understand what the regulator is actually testing, assemble and pressure-test the evidence before it is submitted, respond accurately and completely, and design remediation that closes the issue with verified effectiveness rather than a completed action log.
Issue Diagnosis
We establish what the regulator is testing and what the underlying concern is likely to be.
Evidence Assembly
We gather and challenge the underlying evidence before anything is submitted.
Response
We draft accurate, complete and internally consistent responses with appropriate senior sign-off.
Remediation & Assurance
We design remediation, oversee delivery and test effectiveness after implementation.
What's Included
Information Request Response
Structured, evidenced responses to FCA requests with a clear audit trail.
Gap Analysis Against Regulatory Concern
An honest assessment of exposure before the regulator reaches its own conclusion.
Dear CEO Letter Assessment
Firm-specific assessment against the expectations set out in relevant portfolio letters.
Skilled Person Review Support
Preparation, scoping input, evidence management and support through a s166 review.
Remediation Programme Design
Sequenced remediation with owners, milestones, governance and board reporting.
Post-Remediation Assurance
Independent testing that the remediation has worked, not merely that it has been delivered.
Who this service is for
Firm types
- - Firms in active supervisory correspondence
- - Firms subject to a skilled person review
- - Firms responding to a Dear CEO or portfolio letter
- - Boards requiring independent assurance
Situations & Triggers
- - An FCA information request requires a structured response
- - An internal review has identified regulatory breaches
- - Remediation has stalled or lacks credibility
- - The firm needs to demonstrate effectiveness after remediation
Why firms choose Regulatory Counsel
200+ licence and registration engagements
Applications taken through regulators in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe, Canada, Australia, the Middle East and Asia.
Senior-led
The same senior practitioners run your engagement from the first assessment to the last regulator question.
Every regulated sector
Payment, e-money, money transmission, crypto, banking, lending, insurance, mortgage and investment firms.
In writing, the same day
Every enquiry is answered the same business day, and scope, timeline and fees are set out in writing before work begins.
Related insights
FCA Review of an Insurance Firm in 2026: How to Prepare and Respond
An FCA review should be treated as a regulatory evidence exercise, not as an emergency document-production project. The regulator may begin with a focused information request, a supervisory meeting, a thematic or multi-firm exercise or a concern arising from data, complaints or other intelligence.
FCA Section 165 Information Requests in 2026: How Firms Should Respond
A section 165 notice is a formal FCA demand for information or documents. How to scope it, produce accurate data, meet the deadline and understand the consequences of non-compliance.
FCA VREQs and OIREQs in 2026: Requirements, Restrictions and Remediation
VREQs and OIREQs restrict what an FCA firm can do. How the two routes differ under section 55L FSMA, how to stay compliant, remediate and apply for removal.
More guides
Ready to get started?
Every enquiry is answered the same business day, with a written proposal.
Speak to a licensing expertFrequently asked questions
Accurately, completely and on time. Before responding, establish what the regulator is testing, verify the underlying data rather than relying on what systems report, ensure the response is consistent with previous submissions and regulatory returns, and obtain appropriate senior sign-off. Where the answer is unfavourable, say so and set out what is being done.
A review commissioned under section 166 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, carried out by an independent skilled person and paid for by the firm. It is generally used where the FCA wants independent verification of a firm's position on a specific issue. The scope is set by the FCA and the findings are reported to the regulator.
By carrying out a firm-specific assessment against the expectations set out, evidencing the conclusion rather than asserting compliance, escalating findings to the board and acting where gaps exist. The FCA typically follows up, and firms that responded generically are the ones that struggle.
Clear scoping of the affected population, root cause analysis rather than symptom treatment, realistic sequencing, named accountable owners, board-level oversight, and independent testing after implementation to confirm the issue is actually resolved. Programmes closed on delivery rather than on evidence of effectiveness frequently reopen.
Our role is regulatory and technical rather than legal representation. We work alongside the firm's legal advisers on the regulatory substance, evidence and remediation. Where legal privilege or representation is required, we recommend appropriate specialist counsel.
Yes. Boards frequently need an independent view of whether management's assessment of the regulatory position is accurate, particularly before a transaction, a supervisory meeting or a significant remediation decision.