Retail Banking × Marketing Comms — United Kingdom · published 2026-05-28 · methodology v2.1

Consumer testing obligation under the Consumer Duty

RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q007

What the RLB Specialist Panel found

1. Consumer testing obligation under the Consumer Duty

Question (paraphrased to protect IP): Are firms required to conduct consumer testing under the Consumer Duty, and is any such obligation a binding rule or guidance under PRIN 2A?
Source regulation: Consumer Duty (PS22/9 + PRIN 2A), Financial Conduct Authority (Regulator portal: https://www.fca.org.uk)
What AI assistants typically say: AI tools stated that PRIN 2A.5.10R — identified as a binding rule, marked 'R' in the FCA Handbook — requires firms to test the effectiveness of their communications "where appropriate", and went on to characterise the FCA's finalised guidance FG22/5 as making testing "effectively expected" and "in practice, close to mandatory for many firms".
What the regulator actually says: FG22/5 contains guidance (not rules) recommending firms "should" consider consumer testing of communications. PRIN 2A.5 as a rule requires firms to act to deliver the good consumer understanding outcome, but prescribes no specific methodology for doing so.
Why the AI went wrong: The AI fabricated a specific rule reference — complete with Handbook rule notation — that does not exist in the form described, and then compounded this by mischaracterising discretionary guidance as approaching mandatory status. The AI appears to have conflated the outcome-focused rule with a specific procedural method that the regulator deliberately chose not to mandate.
Cited source(s):
https://handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/PRIN/2A/5.html — Pretextual
https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/finalised-guidance/fg22-5.pdf — Pretextual

Impact for this audience

If a Marketing & Communications team uses the AI's answer to build or update its Consumer Duty communications framework, the firm may implement testing obligations framed as binding rules where none of that specific form exists, or — equally — may overlook the genuine outcome-based obligation that PRIN 2A.5 does impose. Either outcome creates an implementation gap that the FCA could identify during a supervisory review or thematic examination of Consumer Duty compliance. The FCA has publicly stated its intention to scrutinise firms' good consumer understanding outcomes; a firm that cannot demonstrate a coherent and rule-accurate approach to communications review faces potential requirement notices, remediation obligations across its retail communications estate, and reputational exposure if findings are disclosed. The cost of retrospectively auditing and correcting a communications framework applied across a large retail book — and retraining staff briefed on incorrect obligations — is a material operational burden that falls on the firm, not on the AI tool that generated the original error.

References — raw findings (per AI model)

RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q007-Sonnet46 Claude Sonnet 4.6 (web search on)

This finding also affects

Cite this finding

Each finding has a stable Citation ID (RLB-F-… for aggregated case-study findings, RLB-H-… for raw per-model hallucinations) — like a DOI, the ID always resolves to the canonical finding even if URLs change.

Plain text

RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Consumer testing obligation under the Consumer Duty — Retail Banking × Marketing Comms — United Kingdom." Citation ID: RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q007. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-05-28. https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/gb/retail_banking/marketing_comms/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-007/

APA 7th edition

RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Consumer testing obligation under the Consumer Duty [Hallucination finding RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q007]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/gb/retail_banking/marketing_comms/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-007/

Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal)

RegLeg Specialist Panel, Consumer testing obligation under the Consumer Duty [RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q007], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (May 28, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/gb/retail_banking/marketing_comms/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-007/.

BibTeX

@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_F_GB_FCA_CONSUMER_DUTY_PS22_9_Q007,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Consumer testing obligation under the Consumer Duty},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q007},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/gb/retail_banking/marketing_comms/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-007/}
}

← Back to case study summary Case study detail →

About Citation IDs →