An AI agent may do most clerical work in FCA complaints handling: spot a complaint in any channel, log and acknowledge it, gather evidence, track deadlines and draft the final response. A person must decide the outcome, approve any redress and sign the response. The test: if it decides whether the customer was treated fairly, a person does it.
What do the FCA complaints rules require, in plain words?
The FCA's complaints rules require firms to handle complaints from eligible complainants fairly, consistently and promptly. In substance:
- Recognise complaints. A complaint is any expression of dissatisfaction, oral or written, justified or not, about the firm's service or products where the customer alleges they have suffered, or may suffer, loss, distress or inconvenience. It does not need the word "complaint".
- Investigate competently, diligently and impartially, gathering the evidence needed.
- Assess fairly, decide whether the complaint should be upheld, and offer redress or remedial action where appropriate.
- Respond within the time limits, with a final response that explains the outcome and the customer's right to refer the complaint to the ombudsman.
- Record and report complaints, and analyse root causes so that recurring problems are fixed.
Complaints resolved quickly, within a short window set by the rules, can be closed with a simpler response, though the customer must still be told of their ombudsman rights. Our explainer on complaint handling covers the general process.
Who does it apply to?
FCA-authorised firms dealing with eligible complainants, which include consumers, many small businesses, charities and trustees. Banks, payment firms, lenders, insurers, investment firms and many others are covered. The Consumer Duty raises the bar further on consumer support.
Which parts may an agent carry out?
Complaints handling divides cleanly into work that prepares a decision and work that is the decision. The deadlines, it turns out, are the easy part to automate; the judgement is not. We argue this in complaints handling with agents: deadlines are the easy part.
- Recognise. The agent detects dissatisfaction in chat, email, calls and social messages and opens a complaint. A person reviews borderline cases the agent is unsure of.
- Classify. The agent tags product, issue and potential harm against regulatory definitions. A person confirms where classification affects reporting.
- Acknowledge. The agent sends a prompt acknowledgement from an approved template.
- Investigate. The agent gathers records, transcripts, transactions and policy versions, and builds a timeline. A person interviews staff and weighs conflicting evidence.
- Assess. The agent drafts an assessment against the firm's standards, citing evidence. A person decides whether to uphold.
- Redress. The agent calculates options under approved methods. A person approves any redress and its amount.
- Respond. The agent drafts the final response, including ombudsman rights. A person approves and signs it.
- Track and analyse. The agent monitors deadlines, escalates cases at risk and clusters complaints to suggest root causes. A person decides what to fix.
Our playbook on how to classify complaints against regulatory definitions covers the classification step in detail.
Why must the outcome stay with a person?
The rules ask for an impartial, fair assessment. Three reasons make that a person's job.
Fairness is a judgement. Deciding whether a firm treated a customer fairly weighs evidence, policy, context and the Consumer Duty. An agent can lay out the facts; deciding what they mean is the firm's accountability.
The agent may be part of the complaint. Many complaints will soon concern something an agent said or did. An agent assessing a complaint about another agent, or itself, is not impartial.
Redress is money and precedent. Approving redress commits the firm and sets expectations for similar cases. It needs a person with authority.
The agent's draft should state its confidence and what it could not establish. That makes the person's review real rather than a signature on a finished document.
What controls make the split hold?
| Requirement | Control | Evidence it leaves |
|---|---|---|
| Complaints recognised | Agent tested on messages that express dissatisfaction without saying "complaint" | Recognition test results |
| Fair, impartial assessment | Agent cannot close a complaint or send a final response without approval | Approval record on every final response |
| Redress decided with authority | Redress amounts held for a named person | Redress approvals with approver identity |
| Time limits met | Cases nearing limits escalated to a named person, not only a queue | Deadline escalation logs |
| Ombudsman cases handled | Agent assembles the file; a person runs the case | Ombudsman file records |
| Root causes addressed | Agent clusters reach management with a person's conclusions | Root cause reports and actions |
Missing complaints that never use the word is the commonest failure, so recognition testing deserves the most effort. When a complaint goes to the ombudsman, our playbook on how to handle complaints referred to an ombudsman covers the agent's part.
What will the FCA or internal audit ask?
- How do you know the agent recognises complaints that do not use the word?
- Who decides outcomes and approves redress?
- Show us final responses the agent drafted. What did the reviewer change?
- How are complaints about agents themselves handled, and by whom?
- How do root causes found by the agent reach management?
What do the complaints rules not cover?
They do not govern what an agent may tell a customer outside complaints, such as guidance or advice; see FCA guidance vs advice for agents. They do not cover data protection rights requests, which follow UK GDPR. And they do not replace the Consumer Duty's broader support expectations. For the second-line principle behind this split, see our guide to AI compliance agents.
This is an explanation of the rules, not legal advice; confirm how they apply to you with counsel.
Questions people ask
Can an agent send the summary resolution response for a quick complaint?
It can draft it and, once the template and conditions are approved, send it for simple cases resolved to the customer's satisfaction. The response must still include ombudsman rights.
Should complaints about an agent be handled by an agent?
No. A person should assess complaints about agent conduct, both for impartiality and because they reveal where the agent's bounds need changing.
Can the agent decide a complaint is not a complaint?
It should flag uncertain cases for a person. Treating dissatisfaction as a mere query is the error regulators most often find.