FCA Pension Advice Ban Upheld: What This Means for Clients

beehiveweb.co.uk editorial team 2026-08-04 16:09 3 min read

Person reading Financial Times newspaper beside a laptop showing a stock market graph.

The Upper Tribunal has upheld the Financial Conduct Authority’s decision to ban Richard Fenech and Heather Dunne from working in financial services, while narrowing part of the misconduct case used to calculate their fines.

The bans remain in place because the Tribunal agreed that both advisers acted dishonestly by providing the FCA with a backdated appointed representative agreement. It also found failures connected with defined benefit pension transfer advice and the supervision of that work.

Dunne traded as Heather Dunne Independent Financial Adviser and was a pension transfer specialist. Her business was an appointed representative of Financial Solutions Midhurst Ltd, which was owned and run by Fenech.

Findings behind the bans

The Tribunal found that Dunne falsely claimed she had advised some pension schemes before she had actually done so. It also concluded that she failed to take proper care when advising clients about pension transfers, while Fenech failed to oversee her work properly.

Between April 2015 and June 2017, Dunne advised about 92% of her clients to leave defined benefit pension schemes. More than £126 million was transferred as a result, including transfers made when moving the money was not in clients’ best interests.

FCA Pension Advice Ban Upheld: What This Means for Clients

The finding does not mean every transfer recommendation was ruled unsuitable. The FCA had calculated the original penalties on the basis that all of Dunne’s advice breached regulatory requirements, but the Tribunal found that 18% of her clients received unsuitable advice. That distinction reduced the financial penalties without changing its conclusion that both individuals were unfit to work in financial services.

Reduced financial penalties

The Tribunal agreed that fines remained appropriate but reduced Dunne’s penalty to £41,230 and Fenech’s to £16,046. It also ruled that Fenech’s fine should take account only of income earned through his business relationship with Dunne, rather than a wider income base.

The FCA said the ruling supported its decision to impose the industry bans. Therese Chambers, the regulator’s executive director of enforcement and market oversight, said regulated individuals must remain trustworthy even during periods of stress and high pressure, adding that the FCA would continue to act against dishonesty and negligence.

The FCA’s notes identify Upper Tribunal judgments dated 27 April 2026 and 27 July 2026. Dunne and Fenech have 14 days from the date of the relevant Tribunal decision to appeal.

Options for affected pension clients

People who received pension transfer advice during the period covered by the case should not assume that the Tribunal’s overall 18% finding determines whether their own advice was suitable. Individual circumstances and the recommendation given to each client still matter.

The FCA maintains a defined benefit pension transfer advice checker for consumers who want to review whether they may have received poor advice. Clients who believe they were misled or suffered financial loss can also consult the FCA’s information about making a complaint to the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, although eligibility will depend on the circumstances of the individual claim.

The decision also reinforces the responsibilities of firms that oversee appointed representatives: the Tribunal’s findings concerned not only the transfer advice itself, but Fenech’s failure to supervise Dunne’s work properly.

Source: Financial Conduct Authority Press Releases

Context & actions About this article

Source check FCA Regulatory Update

This report is based on the official Upper Tribunal judgment and press release issued by the Financial Conduct Authority.

Checks