Regulatory round-up – July/August 2018


Consumer and Retail Finance – July/August 2018
Latest flurry of activity from the FCA, including final rules and guidance on assessing creditworthiness […]
Latest flurry of activity from the FCA, including final rules and guidance on assessing creditworthiness in consumer credit. Other sector news.
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
The summer months have been as busy as ever, with a constant stream of activity from the FCA.
On 1 July 2018, the FCA’s London office moved to 12 Endeavour Square, London, E20 1JN. Firms should ensure that they include the correct address in their communications with customers, and take active steps to replace materials containing the old address.
On 19 July 2018, the FCA published its annual report and accounts, together with separate reports on competition, diversity and anti-money laundering. See the press release which links through to the documents. Among other things, the annual report looks at the work undertaken in relation to the FCA’s cross-sector priorities (including consumer vulnerability and access to financial services), and its sector priorities (including retail banking and retail lending).
On 30 July 2018, the FCA published its long-awaited final rules and guidance on assessing creditworthiness in consumer credit, with a clear focus on affordability risk. The rules and guidance come into force on 1 November 2018 and there are no transitional arrangements. The FCA expects firms to have effective processes in place aimed at eliminating lending that is foreseeably unaffordable. The new rules and guidance do not represent a significant departure from current practice and the FCA has rowed back from some of its original proposals, including in relation to the ability to take household income into account. Our separate briefing considers the final rules and guidance in more detail and what the changes mean for lenders.
At the start of August 2018, the FCA published an interim report on its review of the retained provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA). When the FCA took over responsibility for regulating consumer credit in 2014, Parliament repealed some CCA provisions and some were replaced by FCA rules. The FCA is required to undertake a review of the remaining provisions and must consider whether repealing them would adversely affect the appropriate degree of protection for consumers. As part of this, it must consider which provisions could be replaced by FCA rules or guidance.
The interim report follows a call for input which was published in February 2016. The FCA says that its objective is the continuing development of an effective and proportionate regulatory regime which ensures appropriate protections for consumers, recognising that some customers in this market may be vulnerable. It includes looking to simplify and modernise the regime where possible and remove unnecessary or disproportionate burdens.
On pages 6 to 8 of the interim report, the FCA summarises its initial assessment for each of the following themes: rights and protections; information requirements; and sanctions. Further details are set out in later chapters. Comments are requested by 2 November 2018 and specific questions are listed in Annex 1. There will also be a series of roundtable meetings with stakeholders in September and October 2018. Finally, the FCA intends to conduct consumer research to better understand how far the CCA provisions meet consumers’ needs. It may also undertake other research, with involvement from firms and other stakeholders. A final report will be presented to HM Treasury before April 2019. Government will ultimately decide about the future of the CCA provisions, but the intention is for the FCA to provide sufficient analysis and evidence in its final report to enable decisions to be made.
On 17 July 2018, the FCA published an Approach to Consumers document and a discussion paper on Duty of Care, which “taken together are intended to ensure there are no gaps in protection for consumers in the financial sector”. See the FCA’s press release and our recent briefing. The discussion paper explores if there is a need for a specific duty of care requirement for firms in financial services. The FCA explains that this follows concerns raised by some stakeholders that the FCA’s regulatory framework, including its Principles, may not be sufficient or applied effectively to prevent harm to consumers and protect them appropriately. Some have said that the introduction of a duty of care could reduce harm by requiring firms to avoid conflicts of interest, as well as supporting longer-term cultural change within firms. Other stakeholders have suggested that existing FCA rules already provide sufficient protections for consumers and impose the same requirements on firms that a duty of care would. Questions are set out on pages 33 and 34 of the paper. Responses and any other comments are requested by 2 November 2018.
The FCA plans to consult early next year on guidance for firms to help them understand more clearly its expectations and requirements for dealing with vulnerable people. It is hosting an event on 18 September 2018 to explore how to make financial services work well for consumers in vulnerable circumstances.
On 4 July 2018, the FCA published near-final rules on the extension of the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SM&CR) to all FSMA-authorised firms. HM Treasury has decided that the regime for solo-regulated firms will commence on 9 December 2019. The FCA says that firms should also read its guidance document, which is a summary of its rules and guidance on the SM&CR. It gives an overview of how the SM&CR works and how the FCA will move firms and individuals to the new regime. The FCA also published a policy statement setting out how it will apply the Duty of Responsibility when the SM&CR is extended.
The FCA consulted towards the end of 2017 on its approach to the recognition of industry codes of conduct in unregulated markets, for the purposes of the SM&CR. It also published a discussion paper which looked at extending the application of Principle 5, so that authorised firms would be required to observe proper standards of market conduct for their unregulated activities. In July 2018, the FCA published a policy statement on the consultation and discussion paper. It says that it will proceed with establishing a process through which it can recognise certain codes in priority areas, to encourage but not mandate their use. In addition to consulting the FCA’s statutory panels and the Bank of England (BoE) about codes proposed for recognition, the FCA will now also publicly consult on each decision to recognise a code to provide transparency to market participants. In light of the feedback received, it has decided not to consult at this time on extending Principle 5 to wholly unregulated activities.
The FCA is consulting until 5 October 2018 on proposals to introduce ‘the Directory’, a new public register for checking the details of key individuals working in financial services. The changes affect all authorised firms in scope of the SM&CR and their employees. A policy statement is expected in winter 2018.
The FCA, BoE and Prudential Regulation Authority published a joint discussion paper on an approach to improve the operational resilience of firms and financial market infrastructures. It “envisages that boards and senior management can achieve better standards of operational resilience through increased focus on setting, monitoring and testing specific impact tolerances for key business services, which define the amount of disruption that could be tolerated”. Feedback is requested by 5 October 2018.
The FCA published its final 2018/19 regulatory fees and levies, with a link to a fee calculator for firms to calculate their individual fees based on the final rates. A two-month consultation on regulatory fees and levies: policy proposals for 2019/20 is expected to be launched in October 2018, with feedback expected in February 2019.
On 10 July 2018, the FCA published a report setting out the findings of its review into the pawnbroking sector, as part of its ongoing focus on high-cost credit. Firms should consider the findings and take any necessary action.
Later in July, the FCA published ‘Occasional paper No.40: Time to act: A field experiment on overdraft alerts’, which reports on the results of a large field experiment on automatically enrolling consumers into just-in-time arranged overdraft alerts and early warning alerts for overdrafts and unpaid items. At the end of June 2018, the FCA published an update on its wide-ranging review of the retail banking sector, which is also critical to its work on overdrafts.
On 26 July 2018, the FCA published the outcome of a programme of behavioural research which, together with its measures on persistent credit card debt and earlier intervention (which apply from 1 September 2018), forms part of the FCA’s efforts to limit the use of credit cards for longer-term borrowing, while preserving their flexibility for millions of users. See the webpage which sets out the key findings and next steps. The FCA is considering consulting on changes to its rules and guidance to mandate the removal of the minimum repayment anchor.
New rules came into force on 15 August 2018, giving consumers and small businesses better information about the services offered by current account providers. See the webpage for details. From November 2018, providers have undertaken to publish in a common form information highlighting the support they offer customers who have one of the four main characteristics of potential vulnerability outlined in the FCA’s Approach to Consumers paper (referred to above); and from 1 February 2019, the FCA will also require providers to publish information quarterly on how long it takes them to open a current account, and how long it takes them to replace a debit card.
On 11 July 2018, the Chair of the FCA and Payment Systems Regulator delivered a speech ‘How can we ensure that Big Data does not make us prisoners of technology?’, in which he spoke about Big Data, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and behavioural science, in the context of technological innovation in financial services: “It’s an important topic, given the UK’s global leadership in both technological innovation and financial services. If we can combine these skills with fair standards and with public trust, we can maximise the opportunities for the UK finance industry to succeed in the global market. And we can revolutionise the quality, price and accessibility of financial services for consumers”.
The FCA recently revealed the fourth round of successful firms in its regulatory sandbox, which allows firms to test innovative products, services or business models in a live market environment, while ensuring that appropriate protections are in place.
In other FinTech news, the FCA announced the creation of a Global Financial Innovation Network, following on from an initial consultation earlier this year on the idea of a ‘global sandbox’. The FCA’s Executive Director of Strategy and Competition said that the network is “an important next step for organisations like ours who are actively engaged in understanding and harnessing the benefits of innovation in financial services for consumers, while managing the potential harm”. The network involves regulators from around the world, and comments on a series of consultation questions on its role are requested by 14 October 2018.
In relation to payment services, the FCA published an updated version of its approach document on payment services and electronic money, showing the changes since it was first published in September 2017. The changes include new guidance on operational and security risks under the revised Payment Services Directive (PSD2). The FCA has also updated its REP018 form on operational risk reporting (see the webpage).
Previously, the FCA made a statement on the European Banking Authority’s draft PSD2 guidelines and opinion on the regulatory technical standards on strong customer authentication and common and secure communication. The FCA said that it planned to consult “during the summer” on changes to its guidance and rules to reflect these.
Separately, the FCA is consulting until 1 November 2018 on rules and guidance to improve conduct standards and communications in the payment services and electronic money sectors.
The FCA has updated its Guidance for firms outsourcing to the ‘cloud’ and other third party IT services.
And finally, since the previous edition of the Regulatory round-up went to press, the FCA issued a consultation on proposed changes to complaint handling rules to help victims of authorised push payment fraud.
Other sector news
John Govett has been appointed as the first CEO of the new Single Financial Guidance Body, which is expected to be established as a legal entity in October 2018 and launched officially in January 2019 (see the press release for details). The new body will replace the Money Advice Service, the Pensions Advisory Service and Pension Wise and will have five core functions: pensions guidance; money guidance; debt advice; consumer protection; and a strategic function (to work with others to develop a national strategy to improve the financial capability of members of the public, their ability to manage debt, and the provision of financial education to children and young people). It will also help provide advice to the Secretary of State on establishment of a debt respite scheme. As we reported in the previous edition of the Regulatory round-up, the government will outline a policy proposal for consultation “later in the summer” and intends to lay regulations to establish the scheme during 2019.
The report of the independent review of the Financial Ombudsman Service was published on 12 July 2018. The review was carried out following concerns about decision-making and governance raised in a Channel 4 Dispatches programme earlier this year. A summary of the specific issues raised in Dispatches can be found on page 5 of the report. A summary of recommendations on wider matters starts on page 6.
The European Commission has decided to carry out an evaluation of the functioning of the Consumer Credit Directive. It recently published an evaluation roadmap setting out the context, purpose and scope of the evaluation, which is due to conclude by Q4 2019. Feedback on the roadmap was requested by 27 July 2018. Consultations are expected to be launched by the end of 2018, with a synopsis report due around spring 2019. The Directive will no longer apply in the UK after Brexit, but it will be interesting to see what comes out of the evaluation.
UK Finance reports that 59 authorised lenders representing 93 per cent of the UK’s residential mortgage market have agreed common standards to help existing borrowers on reversion rates who are up-to-date with repayments but, because of stricter affordability criteria, are currently ineligible to move to an alternative product provided by their lender. This follows on from publication of the FCA’s mortgages market study interim report. See the press release for details.
On 3 July 2018, the European Banking Authority published the first products of its ‘FinTech Roadmap’, including a thematic report on the prudential risks and opportunities arising for institutions from FinTech. See the press release for details.
The Law Commission is consulting until 5 October 2018 on proposals to make the consent regime under UK anti-money laundering laws more effective. It is hoped that the proposals “will help banks and businesses provide better information to law enforcement agencies and help refocus attention on the most suspicious activity”.
On 11 July 2018, HM Treasury published an updated advisory notice on money laundering and terrorist financing controls in higher risk jurisdictions.
The European Data Protection Board responded to a letter from a Member of the European Parliament on certain data protection issues in relation to PSD2, and the Financial Stability Board has been consulting on a draft cyber lexicon comprising a set of 50 core terms related to cyber security and cyber resilience in the financial sector.

Data Protection – July/August 2018
Latest on Privacy Shield and model contract clauses; ICO data analytics investigation, including Facebook fine; […]
Latest on Privacy Shield and model contract clauses; ICO data analytics investigation, including Facebook fine; other recent developments.
EU-US Privacy Shield under threat (as the battle over model contract clauses rumbles on…)
The embattled EU-US Privacy Shield, one of the approved mechanisms for the transatlantic transfer of personal data, is under threat on a number of fronts.
On 5 July 2018, the European Parliament issued a non-binding resolution to suspend the Privacy Shield unless the US complies with EU data protection rules by 1 September 2018. It says that there is a need for better monitoring of the agreement following the recent Facebook/Cambridge Analytica data breach, given that both companies are certified under the Privacy Shield. It is also concerned about a new US law known as the CLOUD Act (Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data), which grants the US and foreign police access to personal data across borders. We reported in the previous edition of the Regulatory round-up that the European Parliament’s Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee had been calling on the European Commission to suspend the Privacy Shield. See the European Parliament’s press release following the recent vote.
The Privacy Shield was criticised even before its launch in July 2016. It was introduced after the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held that the previous framework, ‘Safe Harbor’, was invalid. Following the first annual review of the Privacy Shield in September 2017 the Commission said that, on the whole, the framework continued to ensure an adequate level of data protection, but there was room for improvement. While the European Parliament’s recent resolution is not binding, it will ramp up the pressure on the Commission and its US counterparts when the second annual review takes place in October 2018.
The Privacy Shield was one of the topics discussed by the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) at its second plenary meeting held on 4/5 July 2018 (see the press release). The US Ombudsperson responsible for handling national security complaints under the Privacy Shield was invited to and attended the meeting. The EDPB said that it was particularly interested in the concerns addressed to the US by the EDPB’s predecessor, the Article 29 Working Party. It notes that the meeting was “interesting and collegial” but did not provide a conclusive answer to those concerns, which will remain at the top of the agenda during the second annual review. It is also calling on the US authorities to provide supplementary evidence in order to address the concerns raised.
In separate but related news, we reported previously that the Irish High Court has referred to the CJEU 11 questions over the validity of the Commission’s adequacy decisions on model contract clauses, one of the alternative available data transfer mechanisms. This followed the complaint by privacy activist Max Schrems (who brought down Safe Harbor) to the Irish Data Protection Commissioner about Facebook Ireland’s transfer of his personal data to Facebook Inc. in the US. A number of those questions refer directly to the Privacy Shield. Facebook was recently granted unprecedented leave to appeal to the Irish Supreme Court. The appeal is expected to be heard before the end of 2018, most likely before the CJEU delivers its judgment. Despite this latest twist, the referral to the CJEU still stands.
For now, at least, both the Privacy Shield and model contract clauses remain valid mechanisms for the transatlantic transfer of personal data, but the future is uncertain. Walker Morris will continue to monitor and report on developments.
On the subject of Facebook (again)…
On 10 July 2018, the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) published a detailed progress report on its ongoing investigation into the use of data analytics for political purposes. The investigation was launched in 2017 following concerns over how personal data was used during campaigning for the 2016 EU referendum. The ICO says in its report that the investigation has since broadened, becoming the largest of its type by any data protection authority involving social media online platforms, data brokers, analytics firms, academic institutions, political parties and campaign groups. Facebook and Cambridge Analytica became the focus of the investigation earlier this year.
The ICO investigation has concluded that Facebook broke the law by unfairly processing personal data and failing to take appropriate technical and organisational measures against unauthorised or unlawful processing. The ICO has signalled its intention to fine Facebook £500,000, the maximum financial penalty it can issue under the old Data Protection Act. This is due to the timing of the incidents being investigated. Under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which sits alongside the new Data Protection Act 2018, the ICO can issue financial penalties of up to €20 million or 4% of global turnover, whichever is higher. See the ICO’s blog post for a link through to the progress report and a second report setting out the findings and recommendations from the investigation. The ICO is calling on government to introduce a statutory code of practice for the use of personal data in political campaigns.
Over in the US, leading consumer privacy and civil liberties organisations have been urging the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to conclude its own investigation into the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica scandal and issue its judgment before 1 September 2018 – the cut-off date given by the European Parliament for suspension of the Privacy Shield. In the 16 August letter they refer, among other things, to the ICO’s fine, and to a statement from the European Union Justice Commissioner that the European Commission is “impatiently waiting” for the FTC to conclude its investigation. The organisations say that a lack of enforcement by the FTC of the Privacy Shield would “imperil both European and American consumers and undermine the digital economy”.
As the fallout from the Cambridge Analytica scandal continues, it has been widely reported that Facebook is facing multiple class action lawsuits/group litigation by users whose data was improperly harvested.
On 27 June 2018, just after our previous edition of the Regulatory round-up went to press, the Norwegian Consumer Council published a report ‘Deceived by design: How tech companies use dark patterns to discourage us from exercising our rights to privacy’, in which it analyses a sample of settings in Facebook, Google and Windows 10, and shows how default settings and “dark patterns” – techniques and features of interface design meant to manipulate users – are used to “nudge” users towards privacy intrusive options. It argues that “providers of digital services use a vast array of user design techniques in order to nudge users toward clicking and choosing certain options. This is not in itself a problem, but the use of exploitative design choices, or “dark patterns”, is arguably an unethical attempt to push consumers toward choices that benefit the service provider. We find that the use of these techniques could in some cases be deceptive and manipulative and we find it relevant to raise questions whether this is in accordance with important data protection principles in the GDPR, such as data protection by design and data protection by default… Excessive nudging toward privacy intrusive options, use of dark patterns and privacy intrusive default settings, should in our view not be regarded as freely given or explicit consent”.
We reported previously that Max Schrems’ non-profit organisation “noyb” (meaning “None of Your Business”) has already filed multi-billion-euro complaints against Google, Instagram, WhatsApp and Facebook with various European data protection authorities, over the issue of “forced consent”.
According to the EDPB, most data protection authorities have reported a substantial increase in the number of complaints received since GDPR came into force.
Back in the UK…
The Court of Appeal provided welcome guidance for data controllers on how to approach data subject access requests in “mixed data” cases. See our recent briefing for details.
In its white paper on the future UK-EU relationship, published on 12 July 2018, the government says in relation to data protection that the EU’s adequacy framework provides the right starting point, but reiterates its desire for an “extensive agreement on the exchange of personal data that builds on the existing adequacy framework”. It says that the UK is ready to begin preliminary discussions on an adequacy assessment so that a data protection agreement is in place by the end of the Brexit implementation period at the latest, to provide the earliest possible reassurance that data flows can continue.
Latest from the ICO, including recent enforcement action
On 20 July 2018, the Information Commissioner published her second annual report. Pages 14 to 23 set out the ICO’s major achievements and work this year, in relation to each of its strategic goals. Unsurprisingly, GDPR and the new Data Protection Act feature prominently. See the ICO’s blog post for details.
The ICO is consulting until 10 September 2018 on updating its 2011 data sharing code of practice, to explain and advise on changes to data protection legislation, including transparency, lawful bases for processing, the new accountability principle and the requirement to record processing activities. The Information Commissioner is required to consult with the Secretary of State before preparing the updated code, and is seeking views from interested parties by way of an online form to help inform her work.
The ICO’s Guide to the GDPR was updated in August 2018 to include expanded guidance on international transfers. This is timely, given the current focus on the Privacy Shield and model contract clauses.
The ICO consulted until 28 June 2018 on how it will use its increased powers under new data protection legislation. It has now published a summary of responses to the consultation and the updated Regulatory Action Policy is awaiting parliamentary approval.
In recent enforcement action: a data broking company was fined £140,000 for collecting and selling the personal information of more than 1 million people for political campaigning; a marketing firm was fined £100,000 for making more than 75,000 calls to people who had opted out by registering with the Telephone Preference Service; a firm which was registered as an IT service provider was fined £60,000 after it allowed its lines to be used to send spam texts promoting payday loans to more than 270,000 people, without their consent; and the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse was fined £200,000 after a member of staff sent a bulk email identifying possible abuse victims, having entered the addresses in the “to” field instead of the “bcc” field by mistake. Among other things, the ICO investigation found that staff had not been provided with any, or any adequate, guidance or training, and the Inquiry had breached its own privacy notice by sharing participants’ email addresses with the IT company it had hired to manage the mailing list, without their consent.
The ICO is continuing to investigate the Dixons Carphone data breach announced in June 2018. The company initially said that it had launched an investigation into unauthorised data access affecting 5.9 million payment cards and 1.2 million personal data records. On 31 July 2018, it reported that the investigation, which is nearing completion, has identified that approximately 10 million records containing personal data may have been accessed in 2017.

Health and Safety – July/August 2018
Fire safety guidance consultation; national product safety strategy; gross negligence manslaughter sentencing guideline; other sentencing […]
Fire safety guidance consultation; national product safety strategy; gross negligence manslaughter sentencing guideline; other sentencing news and more.
Government consults on fire safety guidance post-Hackitt
On 19 July 2018, the government issued a consultation on proposed revisions to clarify building regulations fire safety guidance, known as ‘Approved Document B’, in the wake of Dame Judith Hackitt’s independent review of building regulations and fire safety. Her final report was published on 17 May 2018 (see our earlier briefing for details). The stated aim of the consultation is to improve usability and reduce the risk of misinterpretation by those carrying out and inspecting building work. It closes on 11 October 2018.
In a press release, the Secretary of State for Communities said that he will go further by conducting a full-scale end-to-end technical review of Approved Document B. A call for evidence will be published in the autumn. The review will assess, among other things, whether the underlying policy should be updated to reflect modern building practice, the latest understanding of fire risks and technical and scientific innovations.
The clarified Approved Document B and a roadmap for wider technical policy changes will be published early in 2019.
We reported previously that the government has recently consulted on banning combustible materials in the external walls of high-rise residential buildings, and on banning or restricting the use of ‘desktop studies’ as a way of assessing the fire performance of external cladding systems. The outcome of both consultations will be announced in late autumn.
The press release sets out a package of additional measures announced to strengthen safety, including that Dame Judith Hackitt will chair a soon-to-be established Industry Safety Steering Group “to drive the culture change needed to improve safety and hold industry to account”.
Gross negligence manslaughter sentencing guideline
The penalties imposed on individuals for fatal accidents in the workplace are set to increase after the Sentencing Council for England and Wales published its definitive sentencing guideline for gross negligence manslaughter on 31 July 2018. The new guideline comes into effect on 1 November 2018 and applies to individual offenders aged 18 and over who are sentenced on or after that date, regardless of the date of the offence. The Sentencing Council consulted in 2017 on a draft sentencing guideline for gross negligence manslaughter (in addition to other forms of manslaughter). There was previously no existing guideline for sentencing offenders convicted of this form of manslaughter. Notably, the consultation paper said the draft guideline aimed to regularise practice rather than substantially alter it, other than in the case of higher culpability offences arising from health and safety breaches where it was anticipated that sentences would rise. The maximum sentence for gross negligence manslaughter is life imprisonment, with an offence range of one to 18 years in prison.
The guideline is a further indication of the increasingly tough line being taken when it comes to health and safety breaches. As we commented in our recent briefing on the new guideline, there has never been a more prudent time to review and update policies and procedures and upskill managers and directors in their obligations under health and safety legislation to ensure the ‘tone from the top’ is consistent, effective and offers some comfort to those individuals who could ultimately find themselves accountable if disaster strikes. Organisations sentenced for the offence of corporate manslaughter will continue to be assessed in line with a separate sentencing guideline [1].
Other sentencing news
A Wakefield textile company was fined £600,000 after a worker was crushed by a moving conveyor while trying to free a stuck package and later died from his injuries. An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the company had failed to take measures to prevent access to the danger zone and there was no safe system of work for the removal of trapped packages from the machine. The HSE inspector said: “This fatality could have been prevented had the risk been identified. Employers should make sure they properly assess and apply effective control measures to minimise the risk from dangerous parts of machinery.”
Two companies were fined more than £500,000 after a worker was left paralysed following a fall of over three metres through a fragile plastic skylight during a large house refurbishment in London. The HSE investigation found that neither the principal contractor nor the company engaged to carry out demolition work had checked if the skylight was fragile, or taken action to prevent people from falling through it. Among other things, the investigation found that the supervisor directly controlling the work had no formal training relating to supervision and some of the workers, including the victim, had to rely on unofficial interpreters to pass on instructions and tell them what the health and safety records contained.
A Sheffield hot metal forging company was fined £500,000 after a worker was killed while producing metal parts from alloy cylinders. The HSE inspector said: “This tragic incident could easily have been prevented if the employer had acted to identify and manage the risks involved, put a safe system of work in place, and to ensure that the job was allocated to the appropriate equipment”.
A Gwent-based company, which maintains and repairs aircraft components, was fined £400,000 after around 100 employees were exposed to Hand Arm Vibration and developed Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome over 22 years. At least 30 employees were exposed to risk of significant harm.
HSE publishes annual figures for fatal accidents in the workplace
The HSE has released annual data concerning workplace fatalities, showing that for the period between April 2017 and March 2018 144 workers were fatally injured, an increase of nine from the previous year. The construction sector accounts for the largest share – the annual average rate over the last five years is around four times as high as the rate across all industries. The report shows that the three most common causes of fatal injuries continue to be due to workers falling from height, being struck by a moving vehicle, and being struck by a moving object.
Office for Product Safety and Standards publishes national product safety strategy
The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS), launched in January 2018, has published its first ever strategy “to further enhance the UK’s world-leading product safety regime”. See the press release for details. The OPSS vision is “a trusted product safety system that delivers protection for consumers, fairness for business and a competitive market place defined by outcomes of safety and public confidence”. It says that it will drive action through the following four objectives:
- analyse – make the best use of scientific evidence, incident data, risk analysis and intelligence in decision making;
- inform – help consumers make informed choices and give businesses the information they need to comply;
- enforce – use the full range of tools and powers to maintain protection, fairness and confidence; and
- build – a robust product safety system and infrastructure that delivers today and is ready for the challenges of tomorrow.
Pages 9 and 10 of the strategy document set out the key actions which the OPSS intends to take forward, based around these four objectives.
Review of advertising rules relating to products high in fat, sugar and salt
Rules banning the advertising of high fat, salt or sugar food or drink products in children’s media came into force in July 2017, applying to all non-broadcast media, including social media. The Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) recently launched a review of those rules. See our July 2018 Food & Drink update. On 3 August 2018, CAP updated its non-binding advice on the rules.
________________