AI Labs · updated 2026-05-26 · methodology v2.1

Finding on 'Q013 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q013-Opus47

What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Finding on 'Q013 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON

Question (paraphrased to protect IP): Has the FCA withdrawn any pre-Consumer Duty Dear CEO letters following implementation, and if so how many?
AI's response: > "Around 90+ Dear CEO/portfolio letters were retired in April 2025, with a further tranche of multi-firm and thematic reports retired in August 2025."
Regulator's text: FS25/2 (March 2025): FCA removed more than 90 pre-Consumer Duty Dear CEO letters and cleared over 100 old multi-firm reports.
Why the AI went wrong: The FCA's feedback statement FS25/2 was published in March 2025 and announced the withdrawal of both categories simultaneously. The model re-dated the Dear CEO letter withdrawal to April 2025 and fabricated a separate August 2025 tranche for multi-firm reports that does not exist in the regulator's record. The model appears to have split a single announced action into two sequential events, adding invented dates for each.
Cited source(s):
https://www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stories/fca-simplifies-supervisory-letters — Pretextual
Regulator portal (if any cited link is dud): https://www.fca.org.uk

Impact for this audience

This finding implicates the model's temporal reasoning on regulatory events: it split a single March 2025 announcement (FS25/2) into two events across April and August 2025. This suggests the model had partial training coverage of the FS25/2 publication and filled the gaps with invented dates. The fabricated August 2025 tranche is particularly notable because it post-dates the model's likely training window — this may be the model generating a plausible continuation of a partial knowledge record rather than retrieving a real event.

References — raw findings (per AI model)

RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q013-Opus47 Claude Opus 4.7 (web search on)
RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q013-Sonnet46 Claude Sonnet 4.6 (web search on)

← Previous finding Finding on 'Q008 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON Next finding → Finding on 'Q016 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON

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.

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q013-Opus47

Plain text Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding on 'Q013 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON — AI Labs." Citation ID: RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q013-Opus47. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-05-26. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/gb/fca/consumer-duty-ps22-9/whitepaper/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-013--opus-47-websearch/

APA 7th edition Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding on 'Q013 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON [Hallucination finding RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q013-Opus47]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/gb/fca/consumer-duty-ps22-9/whitepaper/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-013--opus-47-websearch/

Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding on 'Q013 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON [RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q013-Opus47], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (May 26, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/gb/fca/consumer-duty-ps22-9/whitepaper/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-013--opus-47-websearch/.

BibTeX Download

@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_GB_FCA_CONSUMER_DUTY_PS22_9_Q013_Opus47,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Finding on 'Q013 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q013-Opus47},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/gb/fca/consumer-duty-ps22-9/whitepaper/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-013--opus-47-websearch/}
}

← Back to case study summary Case study detail →

About Citation IDs →

Every finding on this page compares an AI subject's account of the rule against the regulator's verbatim text from the regulator's own portal. Both are linked. Each delta, its root causes, and impact analysis are documented and published with immutable Citation IDs.