CISI UK RPI — CISI UK Regulation & Professional Integrity Quick Review
Quick review for Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment CISI UK Regulation & Professional Integrity candidates, covering high-yield UK regulation, conduct, market integrity, financial crime, client protection, and ethics themes.
CISI UK RPI Quick Review
This independent quick review is for candidates preparing for the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment exam CISI UK Regulation & Professional Integrity with exam code CISI UK RPI. Use it as a fast consolidation tool before moving into topic drills, mock exams, and detailed explanations.
The exam rewards candidates who can connect rules to practical conduct decisions. Do not just memorise regulator names: practise identifying who is protected, what duty applies, what must be escalated, and which answer best supports market integrity, fair client outcomes, and open dealings with regulators.
High-Yield Exam Map
| Area | What to recognise quickly | Typical exam decision |
|---|---|---|
| UK regulatory structure | FCA, PRA, Bank of England, HM Treasury, FOS, FSCS, ICO, law enforcement | Which body supervises, compensates, investigates, adjudicates, or sets policy |
| FSMA and authorisation | Regulated activities, specified investments, permissions, exemptions | Is the firm/person allowed to carry out the activity? |
| FCA Handbook themes | Principles, conduct rules, COBS, CASS, SYSC, DISP, MAR-related conduct | Which rule family governs the scenario? |
| SMCR and accountability | Senior Managers, Certification Staff, Conduct Rules, fit and proper | Who is accountable and what “reasonable steps” means |
| Client categorisation | Retail client, professional client, eligible counterparty | Level of protection, disclosure, suitability, best execution |
| Advice and dealing | Suitability, appropriateness, execution-only, financial promotions | Is advice being given? Is the product complex? |
| Market abuse and insider dealing | Inside information, unlawful disclosure, manipulation | Avoid trading, disclosing, recommending, or creating false markets |
| Financial crime | AML/CTF, sanctions, bribery, fraud, tax evasion facilitation | Verify, monitor, report suspicions, avoid tipping off |
| Client assets and money | Segregation, records, reconciliations, acknowledgements | Protect client property from firm failure and misuse |
| Complaints and compensation | Firm complaint handling, FOS, FSCS | Who handles the issue and what remedy route applies |
| Professional integrity | Conflicts, honesty, competence, confidentiality, speak-up culture | Choose the ethical, documented, escalated action |
UK Regulatory Architecture
Main Bodies to Distinguish
| Body | Core role | Exam trap |
|---|---|---|
| Financial Conduct Authority | Conduct regulator for financial services firms and markets; consumer protection, market integrity, competition | Do not confuse FCA conduct supervision with compensation or ombudsman decisions |
| Prudential Regulation Authority | Prudential supervision of banks, insurers, and major investment firms where applicable | PRA focuses on safety and soundness, not day-to-day conduct complaints |
| Bank of England | Financial stability, monetary policy, resolution functions, oversight of some market infrastructure | Not the general conduct regulator for investment advisers |
| HM Treasury | Government department responsible for financial services policy and legislation | Sets policy framework; does not handle individual client complaints |
| Financial Ombudsman Service | Independent dispute resolution for eligible complaints | It adjudicates disputes; it is not a compensation scheme for failed firms |
| Financial Services Compensation Scheme | Compensation scheme when authorised firms cannot meet claims | It does not decide ordinary service complaints against solvent firms |
| Information Commissioner’s Office | Data protection and privacy regulator | Relevant where personal data, breaches, or misuse of client information are tested |
| National Crime Agency / law enforcement | Serious crime, suspicious activity reporting framework, criminal investigation | AML suspicion is escalated via internal MLRO processes, not handled informally |
Fast Rule
If the question is about firm conduct, permissions, client treatment, markets, or supervision, think FCA first.
If it is about complaints against a solvent firm, think firm process then FOS.
If it is about a failed authorised firm unable to pay, think FSCS.
If it is about personal data, think UK data protection rules and ICO.
FSMA, Regulated Activities, and Permissions
A common exam pattern is: “Is this activity regulated, and has the firm/person acted properly?”
Regulated Activity Logic
A regulated activity usually involves:
- A specified activity
- In relation to a specified investment
- Carried on by way of business
- In the UK regulatory perimeter, unless an exclusion or exemption applies
- With the correct authorisation or permission
Typical Specified Activities
| Activity type | What it looks like in a scenario |
|---|---|
| Dealing as principal | Firm buys/sells investments for its own account |
| Dealing as agent | Firm executes transactions for a client |
| Arranging deals | Introducing, arranging, or bringing about investment transactions |
| Advising on investments | Personal recommendation to buy, sell, hold, subscribe, or switch |
| Managing investments | Discretionary management of assets for a client |
| Safeguarding and administering assets | Custody or administration of client assets |
| Operating certain schemes/platforms | Running regulated investment structures or services |
Candidate Traps
- Information is not always advice. Generic factual information or research may not be a personal recommendation, but tailored recommendations usually are.
- Introducing can still be regulated. “We only introduced the client” is not a safe answer if the activity amounts to arranging.
- Permissions matter. An authorised firm may still breach requirements if it acts outside its specific permissions.
- Individuals matter too. A firm’s authorisation does not remove personal accountability under conduct rules and SMCR.
FCA Principles and Conduct Expectations
FCA Principles for Businesses: Exam Memory Aid
| Principle theme | Practical meaning |
|---|---|
| Integrity | Act honestly and fairly; no misleading conduct |
| Skill, care, and diligence | Competent decisions, proper review, no careless shortcuts |
| Management and control | Effective systems, controls, governance, risk management |
| Financial prudence | Adequate resources and responsible financial management |
| Market conduct | Proper standards in markets; no abuse or manipulation |
| Customers’ interests | Pay due regard to client interests and fair treatment |
| Communications with clients | Clear, fair, and not misleading |
| Conflicts of interest | Identify, manage, disclose, and avoid where needed |
| Customers: relationships of trust | Take reasonable care where client relies on firm judgment |
| Clients’ assets | Adequate protection for client money and custody assets |
| Relations with regulators | Open, cooperative, and timely disclosure |
| Consumer Duty theme | Deliver good outcomes for retail customers where applicable |
How to Use the Principles in Questions
When two answers look plausible, prefer the answer that:
- Protects the client or market, not the firm’s short-term revenue.
- Discloses or escalates a serious issue rather than concealing it.
- Documents reasoning and uses approved procedures.
- Treats the regulator as a stakeholder entitled to openness.
- Manages conflicts before acting.
- Avoids personal benefit from client information.
SMCR and Individual Accountability
The Senior Managers and Certification Regime is designed to make individual responsibility clear.
| Category | High-yield idea | Exam focus |
|---|---|---|
| Senior Managers | Individuals performing senior management functions with defined responsibilities | Reasonable steps, allocation of responsibilities, oversight |
| Certification Staff | Staff whose roles can cause significant harm to the firm or clients | Annual fitness and propriety assessment by the firm |
| Conduct Rules Staff | Broad population subject to individual conduct expectations | Integrity, care, cooperation, client outcomes, market standards |
| Firm governance | Responsibilities maps, statements, escalation, controls | Avoid vague “everyone was responsible” answers |
Conduct Rule Themes
| Rule theme | What a good answer does |
|---|---|
| Integrity | Refuses dishonesty, concealment, false records, or misleading statements |
| Due skill, care, and diligence | Checks facts, follows process, obtains expertise |
| Open cooperation with regulators | Escalates reportable matters and avoids delay |
| Customers’ interests | Considers fair treatment and client outcomes |
| Market conduct | Avoids manipulation, abuse, or improper disclosure |
| Senior manager reasonable steps | Delegates appropriately, supervises, challenges, and documents |
Reasonable Steps Checklist
For senior manager scenarios, ask:
- Was responsibility clearly allocated?
- Were policies and controls adequate?
- Was delegation reasonable and supervised?
- Were warning signs investigated?
- Was MI reviewed and challenged?
- Were breaches escalated and remediated?
- Was the regulator informed where required?
Client Categorisation
Client classification determines the level of regulatory protection.
| Category | Typical profile | Protection level |
|---|---|---|
| Retail client | Individual or smaller/less sophisticated client | Highest protection |
| Professional client | Larger, experienced, or elective professional meeting relevant criteria | Reduced protection |
| Eligible counterparty | Certain sophisticated market counterparties for specified business | Lowest conduct protections for relevant activities |
Exam Traps
- Do not assume a wealthy person is automatically a professional client.
- Classification affects disclosure, suitability, appropriateness, and communication standards.
- When uncertain, the safer exam answer often treats the client as needing higher protection.
- Reclassification requires process; it is not just a sales preference.
Advice, Suitability, Appropriateness, and Execution-Only
This is one of the most commonly tested decision areas.
flowchart TD
A[Client transaction or investment discussion] --> B{Personal recommendation?}
B -->|Yes| C[Suitability required]
B -->|No| D{Non-advised service?}
D --> E{Complex product or service?}
E -->|Yes| F[Appropriateness assessment]
E -->|No| G{Execution-only conditions met?}
G -->|Yes| H[No suitability assessment, but clear process and disclosures]
G -->|No| F
Suitability vs Appropriateness
| Test | Applies when | Main question |
|---|---|---|
| Suitability | Personal recommendation or discretionary management | Is this suitable for this client? |
| Appropriateness | Certain non-advised services, especially complex products | Does the client have knowledge and experience to understand the risks? |
| Execution-only | Client instructs without advice, usually for non-complex products and required conditions | Has the firm avoided giving advice and followed disclosure/process rules? |
Suitability Factors
For advice or discretionary management, consider:
- Investment objectives
- Risk tolerance and capacity for loss
- Knowledge and experience
- Financial situation
- Time horizon
- Liquidity needs
- Tax and personal circumstances where relevant
- Costs and charges
- Product complexity
- Concentration risk
Common Wrong Answers
| Scenario | Wrong instinct | Better exam answer |
|---|---|---|
| Client insists on unsuitable trade | “Client asked, so execute” | Warn, document, follow firm policy; do not disguise advice |
| Adviser knows client well | “No need to update information” | Keep information current before recommending |
| Product is profitable for firm | “Recommend if returns are strong” | Suitability and conflicts come first |
| Client has traded before | “Appropriateness always satisfied” | Assess knowledge and experience for the product/service |
| Generic brochure sent | “Always advice” | Usually communication/promotion unless personalised recommendation |
Financial Promotions and Client Communications
Core Standard
Communications should be clear, fair, and not misleading.
| Requirement | Practical meaning |
|---|---|
| Balanced presentation | Do not highlight benefits while hiding material risks |
| Accurate risk warnings | Risk must be prominent and understandable |
| Fair performance information | Avoid cherry-picked returns or misleading comparisons |
| Target audience alignment | Promotion should be appropriate for the intended recipients |
| Approval and recordkeeping | Follow firm approval controls before issue |
| No pressure or ambiguity | Avoid language that undermines informed decision-making |
Exam Traps
- “Past performance” language is frequently tested: past returns must not be presented as a guarantee.
- Small print cannot cure a misleading headline.
- A communication can be non-compliant even if every statement is technically true but the overall impression misleads.
- Social media and informal messages can still be financial promotions.
Conflicts of Interest
Conflicts are not automatically banned, but they must be identified and managed properly.
Conflict Decision Rule
- Identify the conflict.
- Avoid it if it cannot be managed.
- Manage it through controls, separation, pricing, allocation rules, supervision, or removal of incentives.
- Disclose it clearly where disclosure is part of the control.
- Obtain consent where required.
- Record the conflict and the action taken.
| Conflict type | Example | Proper response |
|---|---|---|
| Firm vs client | Firm earns more from one product recommendation | Manage inducements, ensure suitability, disclose material conflicts |
| Client vs client | Limited allocation of a popular issue | Fair allocation policy |
| Employee vs client | Personal dealing ahead of client order | Pre-clearance, restricted lists, no front-running |
| Research vs corporate finance | Analyst pressured to support banking client | Information barriers and independence controls |
| Gifts and hospitality | Lavish entertainment from counterparty | Apply policy, assess intent and proportionality |
Client Money and Client Assets
Client asset rules aim to protect clients if a firm fails or misuses assets.
| Concept | Meaning | Exam point |
|---|---|---|
| Client money | Money held for or on behalf of clients in investment business | Must be segregated and controlled under client money processes |
| Custody asset | Safe-custody investment held for a client | Requires safeguarding, records, reconciliations |
| Segregation | Separating client property from firm property | Prevents client assets being treated as firm assets |
| Reconciliation | Checking internal records against external records | Detects discrepancies early |
| Acknowledgement letters | Bank/custodian recognition of client money status | Helps preserve client ownership |
| Mandates | Authority over client money/assets without holding them directly | Still requires controls |
CASS Traps
- Do not treat client money as a firm funding source.
- Do not delay allocation or reconciliation because “the client is known.”
- Strong records matter as much as physical segregation.
- If a shortfall or error is found, escalate and correct using firm procedures.
- Client asset protection is a regulatory duty, not just an operations issue.
Market Abuse, Insider Dealing, and Market Integrity
Inside Information
Inside information is generally information that is:
- Precise
- Not public
- Relates directly or indirectly to an issuer or financial instrument
- Likely to have a significant effect on price if made public
Prohibited Conduct Themes
| Conduct | What it looks like |
|---|---|
| Insider dealing | Trading while in possession of inside information |
| Unlawful disclosure | Passing inside information to someone without proper purpose |
| Recommending or inducing | Encouraging another person to trade using inside information |
| Market manipulation | False or misleading signals, price positioning, abusive trading patterns |
| Misleading disclosures | Creating a false picture through announcements or omissions |
Practical Exam Responses
If an employee receives possible inside information:
- Stop and do not trade.
- Do not pass it to colleagues casually.
- Escalate to compliance or the proper internal function.
- Follow wall-crossing, insider list, restricted list, and personal account dealing controls.
- Document the issue.
- Avoid recommendations until cleared.
Market Abuse Traps
| Question wording | Trap | Better answer |
|---|---|---|
| “The information came from a friend” | Source does not matter | If it is inside information, do not trade |
| “Only a small order” | Size does not make it acceptable | Abuse can occur regardless of size |
| “The rumour later proved true” | Rumour vs inside information issue | Escalate; do not rely on market gossip |
| “Everyone in the team knows” | Internal knowledge is not public | Public disclosure is different from internal circulation |
| “Client asked urgently” | Client pressure does not override market rules | Refuse/hold and escalate |
Personal Account Dealing
Personal account dealing rules reduce conflicts and misuse of information.
| Control | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Pre-clearance | Checks conflicts, restricted lists, and timing |
| Restricted/watch lists | Prevent trading where sensitive information exists |
| Holding periods | Discourage short-term speculative abuse |
| Duplicate contract notes/statements | Monitoring and surveillance |
| Blackout periods | Prevent dealing around sensitive events |
| Disclosure of outside interests | Identifies conflicts and influence risks |
Common Mistakes
- Trading through a spouse, relative, company, or nominee can still be caught.
- Personal dealing after seeing a client order may be front-running.
- “I did not profit” is not a complete defence to poor conduct.
- Failure to disclose can be a breach even if the trade itself would have been allowed.
Financial Crime: AML, CTF, Sanctions, Fraud, and Bribery
AML/CTF Risk-Based Approach
| Step | Key action |
|---|---|
| Risk assessment | Assess customer, product, geography, delivery channel, and transaction risk |
| Customer due diligence | Identify and verify customer; understand purpose and nature of relationship |
| Beneficial ownership | Identify who ultimately owns or controls the customer |
| Enhanced due diligence | Apply greater scrutiny to higher-risk relationships |
| Ongoing monitoring | Review transactions and relationship profile over time |
| Suspicion escalation | Report internally to the MLRO or nominated officer |
| Recordkeeping | Maintain evidence of checks, decisions, and monitoring |
Suspicious Activity Decision Rule
If something appears inconsistent with the client profile, source of funds, purpose, or economic rationale:
- Do not ignore it.
- Do not warn the client in a way that could amount to tipping off.
- Escalate internally.
- Follow the firm’s SAR process.
- Continue, pause, or exit only under approved procedures.
Sanctions
Sanctions risk is strict and operationally important.
| Scenario | Correct mindset |
|---|---|
| Potential name match | Escalate and screen carefully; do not dismiss informally |
| Client wants to route via third party | Consider evasion risk |
| Existing client becomes sanctioned | Freeze/stop activity as required by procedure and escalate |
| Cross-border transaction | Check jurisdictions, counterparties, beneficial owners, and payment chain |
Bribery and Corruption
| Risk | Example | Proper response |
|---|---|---|
| Bribe | Payment or benefit to influence conduct improperly | Refuse and report |
| Facilitation payment | Payment to speed up routine action | Treat as bribery risk; follow policy |
| Gifts and hospitality | Excessive entertainment or benefits | Assess value, timing, intent, and transparency |
| Third-party introducer | Agent paid to win business | Due diligence and monitoring |
| Public official exposure | Benefit offered to government-linked person | Enhanced scrutiny |
Fraud and Tax Evasion Facilitation
Be alert to:
- False documents
- Unexplained urgency
- Complex structures with no commercial rationale
- Requests to misstate ownership or residence
- Unusual payment routes
- Pressure to bypass controls
- Backdated or incomplete records
Complaints, Redress, FOS, and FSCS
Complaint Handling Logic
| Stage | Key issue |
|---|---|
| Client expression of dissatisfaction | Recognise whether it is a complaint under firm process |
| Internal investigation | Fair, prompt, impartial review |
| Final response | Communicate outcome, reasons, and rights |
| FOS referral | Eligible complainants may refer unresolved disputes |
| Redress | Aim to put client in the appropriate position where loss was caused |
| Root cause analysis | Fix systemic issues, not only the individual case |
FOS vs FSCS
| Feature | FOS | FSCS |
|---|---|---|
| Main purpose | Resolves complaints/disputes | Pays compensation where authorised firm cannot meet claims |
| Firm status | Usually solvent firm dispute | Firm failed or unable to pay |
| Focus | Fair and reasonable outcome | Eligibility and compensation limits |
| Example | Poor advice complaint against active firm | Failed firm cannot compensate client |
Exam Traps
- A complaint should not be dismissed because the client used the wrong terminology.
- Do not tell a client they cannot complain because they signed a form.
- Settlement should not be used to hide a reportable issue.
- Compensation route depends on facts: complaint against a firm is different from failure of a firm.
Data Protection and Confidentiality
Core Data Protection Principles
| Principle | Practical meaning |
|---|---|
| Lawfulness, fairness, transparency | Tell clients how data is used and use it lawfully |
| Purpose limitation | Use data for legitimate specified purposes |
| Data minimisation | Collect only what is needed |
| Accuracy | Keep data correct and up to date |
| Storage limitation | Do not keep data longer than needed |
| Integrity and confidentiality | Protect against unauthorised access, loss, or misuse |
| Accountability | Evidence compliance with policies and controls |
Confidentiality Traps
| Scenario | Trap | Correct approach |
|---|---|---|
| Colleague asks for client details | Internal access is not automatically justified | Need business purpose and access rights |
| Client information sent to personal email | Convenience is not acceptable | Use approved systems |
| Regulator/law enforcement request | “Confidentiality prevents disclosure” | Escalate and follow lawful disclosure procedure |
| Family member asks about client | Relationship does not matter | Do not disclose without authority |
| Lost device or misdirected email | “No harm done” | Escalate as a potential breach |
Professional Integrity Themes
The professional integrity part of CISI UK Regulation & Professional Integrity often tests judgment rather than rote learning.
Integrity Decision Framework
Use this sequence when an ethics question feels ambiguous:
- Legality: Is the action lawful and within regulatory rules?
- Client interest: Does it treat the client fairly and support good outcomes?
- Market integrity: Could it mislead the market or misuse information?
- Conflicts: Are conflicts identified, avoided, managed, or disclosed?
- Competence: Am I qualified and informed enough to act?
- Transparency: Would the action withstand regulator, client, employer, and public scrutiny?
- Escalation: Should compliance, management, MLRO, or legal be involved?
- Documentation: Is the decision and rationale recorded?
Ethical Red Flags
| Red flag | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| “Just this once” | Signals intentional control bypass |
| “Everyone does it” | Culture does not override rules |
| “Do not put it in writing” | Suggests concealment |
| “The client will never know” | Violates trust and transparency |
| “We need the revenue” | Commercial pressure is not a defence |
| “Compliance will slow us down” | Control avoidance is itself misconduct |
| “Backdate it” | False records and integrity breach |
| “Use your personal phone/email” | Surveillance, recordkeeping, and confidentiality risk |
Professional Conduct in Common Scenarios
| Scenario | Best answer pattern |
|---|---|
| Client asks for product outside your expertise | Do not bluff; seek specialist support or decline |
| Client wants to hide beneficial owner | Refuse to bypass CDD; escalate |
| Manager pressures you to ignore a breach | Challenge, escalate, document |
| You discover an error benefiting the firm | Correct and disclose through proper process |
| You receive confidential price-sensitive information | Do not trade; escalate immediately |
| Client offers expensive gift before allocation decision | Decline or escalate under gifts policy |
| Firm incentive conflicts with client suitability | Suitability and conflict management override sales target |
| System control fails | Escalate, assess impact, remediate, record |
| Regulator requests information | Be open, cooperative, accurate, and timely |
| Complaint indicates wider issue | Handle complaint and investigate root cause |
Best Execution and Order Handling
Best Execution Factors
Firms should take appropriate steps to obtain the best possible result for clients, considering relevant execution factors.
| Factor | What to consider |
|---|---|
| Price | Instrument price |
| Costs | Commission, fees, spreads, settlement costs |
| Speed | How quickly the order can be executed |
| Likelihood of execution | Probability of completing the trade |
| Likelihood of settlement | Probability settlement completes successfully |
| Size | Impact of order size on execution |
| Nature | Product type, market conditions, client instructions |
Order Handling Traps
- Specific client instructions may affect best execution obligations for the instructed element.
- Client orders should not be misused for proprietary or personal trading.
- Aggregation and allocation must be fair and controlled.
- Delay in execution must be justified by client interest, not firm convenience.
- Records must support how orders were handled.
Recordkeeping and Evidence
In regulatory exams, “document it” is often part of the best answer, but it is rarely enough by itself.
| Situation | Record needed |
|---|---|
| Advice | Client information, recommendation, suitability rationale |
| Appropriateness | Assessment result and warnings if applicable |
| Conflicts | Conflict identified and management action |
| Complaints | Complaint, investigation, response, redress |
| AML | CDD, EDD, monitoring, internal reports |
| Market abuse | Escalation, restricted list decisions, surveillance alerts |
| Client assets | Reconciliations, acknowledgements, discrepancies |
| Training/competence | Role competence, supervision, CPD evidence |
| Breaches | Facts, impact, remediation, escalation |
Exam Rule
A record does not make misconduct acceptable. The correct answer is usually: do the right thing, escalate where required, and keep evidence.
Common Exam Wording Traps
| Wording | What to watch |
|---|---|
| “Informally” | May imply bypassing records, approvals, or surveillance |
| “Urgently” | Pressure does not remove regulatory obligations |
| “Small amount” | Size does not excuse misconduct |
| “Long-standing client” | Familiarity does not remove CDD, suitability, or complaint duties |
| “Sophisticated client” | May still be retail unless properly classified |
| “No loss occurred” | Breach can occur without loss |
| “The client consented” | Consent does not cure all conflicts or illegal conduct |
| “The information is widely discussed” | Rumour is not the same as public disclosure |
| “The manager approved it” | Personal conduct duties still apply |
| “The firm will lose business” | Commercial pressure is not a defence |
Rapid Review: Choose the Better Answer
| If the question asks… | Prefer this answer |
|---|---|
| Trade or wait after receiving sensitive information? | Wait, restrict, escalate |
| Ignore or investigate suspicious funds? | Investigate and escalate to MLRO |
| Explain only upside or balanced risks? | Balanced, clear, fair communication |
| Use client money temporarily or segregate? | Segregate and reconcile |
| Accept gift or apply policy? | Apply gifts/conflicts policy |
| Handle complaint informally or through process? | Recognise and follow complaint process |
| Conceal breach or tell regulator where required? | Open and cooperative disclosure |
| Recommend high-commission product or suitable product? | Suitable product and conflict control |
| Act outside competence or seek help? | Seek help or decline |
| Backdate document or correct error transparently? | Correct transparently |
Final Preparation Checklist
Before question-bank practice, make sure you can explain:
- The difference between FCA, PRA, FOS, FSCS, HM Treasury, Bank of England, and ICO.
- How to identify a regulated activity and why permissions matter.
- The practical meaning of FCA Principles and individual conduct expectations.
- How SMCR links responsibility, reasonable steps, and escalation.
- Retail vs professional vs eligible counterparty treatment.
- Suitability vs appropriateness vs execution-only.
- What makes a communication clear, fair, and not misleading.
- How conflicts should be identified, managed, disclosed, or avoided.
- How client money and custody assets must be protected.
- The difference between inside information, insider dealing, unlawful disclosure, and manipulation.
- The AML escalation route and why tipping off matters.
- The difference between complaints, FOS, and FSCS.
- How professional integrity questions reward honesty, competence, accountability, and documentation.
How to Use Practice Questions After This Review
Use this page for a fast pass, then move into independent companion practice:
- Start with topic drills on regulation structure, conduct rules, market abuse, financial crime, and client protection.
- Review every missed answer with detailed explanations, not just the correct option.
- Keep a short error log: rule missed, trap wording, and better decision rule.
- Re-test weak areas with fresh original practice questions.
- Finish with timed mock exams to practise reading carefully under pressure.
Your next step: use a question bank to test each section above, especially scenario questions where several answers look professional but only one best supports regulation, market integrity, fair client outcomes, and personal accountability.