OFICIAL Financial Conduct Authority News

FCA decides to ban and fine Daniel Thomas over unauthorised pension transfer advice

What happened
Based on Financial Conduct Authority News · Sep 02, 2026

The FCA has banned Daniel Thomas from financial services and fined him £742,700 for giving unauthorised pension transfer advice to 53 clients over five years.

FCA decides to ban and fine Daniel Thomas over unauthorised pension transfer advice
Financial Conduct Authority News — Financial Conduct Authority
Key points
·
FCA banned Daniel Thomas and fined him £742,700 for unauthorised pension transfer advice without required qualifications.
·
Mr Thomas advised 53 clients on 63 transfers while earning over £173,000 in fees between 2018 and 2023.
·
He misled clients, pension providers, and his principal firm while destroying records and obstructing the FCA’s investigation.
Key numbers
·
The FCA has banned Daniel Thomas from financial services and fined him £742,700 for giving unauthorised pension transfer advice to 53 clients over five years.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has issued a Decision Notice banning Daniel Thomas from working in financial services and imposing a £742,700 fine. The regulator found he gave reckless advice on defined benefit pension transfers without the required qualifications or permissions. Mr Thomas has appealed the decision to the Upper Tribunal, where the matter will be reviewed; the FCA’s findings remain provisional until the Tribunal rules.

Between 2018 and 2023, Mr Thomas advised 53 clients on 63 transfers out of defined benefit pension schemes while working as a director and financial adviser at DPT Financial Solutions Limited. He earned over £173,000 in fees from these transactions, despite lacking the necessary specialist qualifications to provide such advice.

The FCA investigation found Mr Thomas repeatedly misled both clients and pension providers about his professional qualifications. He also destroyed client records and failed to cooperate with the regulator’s enquiries, further obstructing oversight of his activities.

Mr Thomas’ firm operated as an appointed representative, meaning a principal firm was responsible for overseeing its conduct. He provided misleading information to his principal about his role in the pension transfer cases, breaching the trust placed in him to protect consumers’ retirement savings.

Original source → Deals on Clipraptor.com →