Retail Banking × Risk — United Kingdom · updated 2026-06-11

Finding#3 . Inverted FG22/5 on fair-value quantification for non-monetary benefits

RLB Citation ID: RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008

AI's failure:Inference Drift Risk for Retail Banking × Risk:Regulatory enforcement / professional liability exposure

What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Finding#3 . Inverted FG22/5 on fair-value quantification for non-monetary benefits

Citation ID: RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008-Opus47
AI's failure: AI inverted a regulator negative into an affirmative methodological requirement
Risk for Risk x Retail Banking: Regulatory enforcement and operational-decision exposure where the FCA's text resolves the question differently Retail Banking risk teams reviewing fair-value assessment outputs need the qualitative-only standard preserved. The model's reversal would push the risk function to demand quantitative non-monetary analysis the FCA has expressly not required, creating internal disputes between risk, product, and compliance over a fabricated methodological standard.
see this finding ->

Impact for Risk Teams in Retail Banking Sector in the United Kingdom working with the Consumer Duty (PS22/9 + PRIN 2A)

Retail Banking risk teams reviewing fair-value assessment outputs need the qualitative-only standard preserved. The model's reversal would push the risk function to demand quantitative non-monetary analysis the FCA has expressly not required, creating internal disputes between risk, product, and compliance over a fabricated methodological standard.

References — raw findings (per AI model)

RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008-Opus47 Claude Opus 4.7 (web search on)
RLB-H-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008-Sonnet46 Claude Sonnet 4.6 (web search on)

This finding also affects

← Previous finding Finding#2 . Confused FG22/5 guidance with PRIN 2A.5 rule on consumer testing Next finding → Finding#4 . Imposed substantiated-comparison expectation FG22/5 does not require

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-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008

Plain text Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding#3 . Inverted FG22/5 on fair-value quantification for non-monetary benefits — Retail Banking × Risk — United Kingdom." Citation ID: RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-06-11. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/gb/fca/consumer-duty-ps22-9/sectors/retail_banking/risk/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-008/

APA 7th edition Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding#3 . Inverted FG22/5 on fair-value quantification for non-monetary benefits [Hallucination finding RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/gb/fca/consumer-duty-ps22-9/sectors/retail_banking/risk/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-008/

Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding#3 . Inverted FG22/5 on fair-value quantification for non-monetary benefits [RLB-F-GB-FCA-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-Q008], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (June 11, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/gb/fca/consumer-duty-ps22-9/sectors/retail_banking/risk/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-008/.

BibTeX Download

@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_F_GB_FCA_CONSUMER_DUTY_PS22_9_Q008,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Finding#3 . Inverted FG22/5 on fair-value quantification for non-monetary benefits},
  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/regulators/j3/gb/fca/consumer-duty-ps22-9/sectors/retail_banking/risk/finding/GB-FCA-GB-001-CONSUMER-DUTY-PS22-9-v1-008/}
}

← 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.