AI Hallucination Research › Audiences › Sectors › United Kingdom › Retail Banking › Product Bizdev › Detail › Finding
Retail Banking × Product Bizdev — United Kingdom · published 2026-05-28 · methodology v2.1

Quantification requirements in Consumer Duty fair value assessments

RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008
What the RLB Specialist Panel found

1. Quantification requirements in Consumer Duty fair value assessments

  • Question (paraphrased to protect IP): Does the Consumer Duty require firms to quantify non-monetary benefits as part of a fair value assessment, and what methodology does the FCA expect?
  • Source regulation: Consumer Duty (PS22/9 + PRIN 2A), Financial Conduct Authority (Regulator portal: https://www.fca.org.uk)
  • What AI assistants typically say: Multiple AI tools gave similar incorrect responses, characterising quantification as either encouraged where feasible or implicitly expected beyond a qualitative description — while treating qualitative assessment as a fallback that applies only when quantification is impractical. One tool framed the FCA's position as permissive toward quantification with qualitative assessment as an acceptable substitute; another stated that firms are expected to go beyond qualitative description and provide substantiated comparisons.
  • What the regulator actually says: The FCA does not expect firms to quantify non-monetary costs and benefits as part of its fair value assessment process, but firms should undertake some form of qualitative assessment.
  • Why the AI went wrong: Both AI tools inverted the regulator's position — treating a clear statement that quantification is not expected as an implicit encouragement to quantify, and converting an unconditional obligation to conduct qualitative assessment into a conditional fallback. The error appears to reflect AI tools defaulting toward more rigorous-sounding interpretations of regulatory standards rather than accurately representing what the source text says.
  • Cited source(s):
  • https://handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/PRIN/2A/4.html — Pretextual
  • https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/finalised-guidance/fg22-5.pdf — Pretextual
  • https://www.fca.org.uk/publications/good-and-poor-practice/consumer-duty-find... — Pretextual
Impact for this audience

A Product & Business Development team at a Retail Banking firm that relies on this AI answer when building or updating its fair value assessment framework risks constructing a process that over-engineers the quantification step while misunderstanding the unconditional nature of the qualitative assessment obligation. That framework would then underpin product approval submissions, pricing rationales, and Consumer Duty board reporting — each of which carries the same foundational error. If the FCA identifies the deficiency through a supervisory review or thematic examination, the firm faces remediation requirements, potential public censure, and — where consumer detriment is established — redress obligations and financial penalties under the FCA's Consumer Duty enforcement powers.

References — raw findings (per AI model)
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). "Quantification requirements in Consumer Duty fair value assessments — Retail Banking × Product Bizdev — United Kingdom." Citation ID: RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-05-28. https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/gb/retail_banking/product_bizdev/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-008/
APA 7th edition 
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Quantification requirements in Consumer Duty fair value assessments [Hallucination finding RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/gb/retail_banking/product_bizdev/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-008/
Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) 
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Quantification requirements in Consumer Duty fair value assessments [RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (May 28, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/gb/retail_banking/product_bizdev/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-008/.
BibTeX 
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_F_GB_FCA_CONSUMER_DUTY_PS22_9_Q008,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Quantification requirements in Consumer Duty fair value assessments},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/gb/retail_banking/product_bizdev/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-008/}
}
← Back to case study summary Case study detail →
About Citation IDs →