Rules and ethics
Edinburgh approves, Glasgow publishes: affiliate compliance cycle
How an Edinburgh firm and a Glasgow publisher run an affiliate approval cycle under FCA and ASA rules: brief, draft, approve, monitor and keep the records.
What to take away
- The firm that approves a financial promotion owns it, even when an external partner drafted the copy.
- Run four stages in writingbrief, draft, approve and monitor.
- Review each draft in one pass against section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 where relevant, the product rules and the CAP Code.
- Record the approver, the approver's status, the version and the date, and keep an archived copy of what went live.
- Edited copy lapses approval and needs a fresh review before it stays live.
Give the firm and the publisher separate jobs
An affiliate post written by a Glasgow publisher and approved by an Edinburgh firm is the firm's promotion. The firm carries responsibility for the content, even when an external partner drafted it. That is why approval cannot be a formality.
The duties do not differ between the two cities. The FCA's financial promotion rules and the CAP Code apply on the same terms in Edinburgh, Glasgow and the rest of the UK. What changes is the handover. An Edinburgh platform paying a Glasgow publisher for ISA transfer leads creates a promotion approved in one city and published in the other.
So the paperwork has to name both parties and the version approved. Record where the firm, publisher and approving team are based, which audience the content targets and where the approved version appears. The publisher's location does not remove the firm's approval obligations.
A promotion aimed at UK consumers from a Scottish firm falls inside the regime wherever the publisher is registered. Offshore hosting changes nothing.
Four-stage approval workflow
- Brief publisher in writing
- Review draft against CAP and FCA rules
- Approve in writing and release tracking link
- Monitor live pages monthly and re-approve changes
| Stage | The firm | The publisher | Record kept |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brief | Names product, audience, warnings and off-limit claims | Confirms the brief | The signed brief |
| Draft | Returns comments in one pass | Drafts copy and any table | The draft |
| Approve | Names the approver and version, then releases the link | Publishes only the approved version | The approval note |
| Monitor | Checks live pages monthly and re-approves after changes | Keeps claims current | Live URL and dated screenshot |
Write the brief and check who is approving
A written brief starts the cycle. It names the product, the audience, the required warnings and the claims that are off limits. Without it, the review ends up arguing about what the copy was meant to do instead of testing it against the rules.
Scottish firms use affiliates for current account switching, mortgage introductions, investment platform sign-ups, insurance quotes and debt advice referrals. Each vertical carries its own approval burden. Debt advice and credit broking attract the heaviest scrutiny, so say so in the brief.
Section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 generally prevents an unauthorised person from communicating a financial promotion. Two routes avoid that: an appropriately authorised person approves it, or an exemption applies under the Financial Promotion Order 2005.
Check the approving firm's status and relevant permissions on the FCA Financial Services Register. An FCA reference number alone does not establish that it can approve a promotion.
Record the firm's legal name and FCA reference in the programme file. The FCA's Warning List lets you search for unauthorised firms and individuals that the FCA is aware of. Neither an affiliate link nor an FCA reference number should be treated as an endorsement of a product. The signed brief belongs in the same file.
Review the draft in one pass
Review the draft once and return every comment together. The review tests the copy against three sources: section 21 where relevant, the product rules that apply and the CAP Code. A single pass keeps the publisher to one round of edits.
| Source | Rule | What the reviewer asks |
|---|---|---|
| FSMA section 21 | Approval or exemption | Is an authorised person approving, or does an exemption apply? |
| COBS 4.2.1R | Investments: fair, clear and not misleading | Would an ordinary reader be misled by the copy or table? |
| ICOBS, CONC, BCOBS | Insurance, consumer credit, banking | Which product rulebook applies to this product? |
| CAP Code 2.3 | Obviously identifiable | Does the reader know the link is paid? |
| CAP Code 3.1 and 3.3 | Misleading advertising and omissions | Does anything misleading or missing change the picture? |
| CAP Code 3.7 | Evidence for objective claims | Is dated evidence on file for each claim? |
Risk warnings must match the product and the relevant rules. COBS 4.12A.6R sets specific wording for restricted mass market investments, but that wording is not a universal warning for every investment promotion. Credit promotions may require representative APR figures where the rules demand them, while insurance promotions should state material limits of cover plainly.
Substantiation is the second duty. If a Glasgow publisher writes that a platform has the lowest fees, the claim needs evidence. "Best" and "cheapest" invite a challenge unless the comparison is defined and provable.
Comparisons must be like for like, with the basis stated: a table of account fees must compare the same account tier on the same date.
The ASA Rulings database provides named enforcement decisions to check against finance affiliate content. Rulings show how the regulator treats risk warnings placed below the fold or buried in a footnote.
Advice for businesses on advertising rules affecting finance promotions is free and worth using before a launch. Firms can ask about a specific concept before spend is committed. The firm's own advertising rules checks should run before the brief goes out, because a compliant landing page does not rescue a non-compliant advert.
Approve in writing and release the link
Approval is a written note, not a nod. It names the approver, the approver's relevant status, the version approved and the date. Only then does the firm release the tracking link.
Six requirements do most of the work in a Scottish finance affiliate programme. Treat them as the minimum, not the ceiling.
Six named compliance requirements
- Identify authorised firm and FCA reference
- Label paid content clearly
- Substantiate claims with dated evidence
- Include risk warning or APR statement
- Record who approved and when
- Keep published version for archive
- Check the firm's status and relevant permissions on the FCA Financial Services Register; record its legal name and FCA reference for the programme file.
- Label paid content clearly, using wording a reader understands without effort.
- Substantiate every performance, price and comparison claim with dated evidence.
- Include any product-specific risk warning or representative APR required by the applicable rules, in the position those rules require.
- Record who approved the promotion, the approver's relevant status and when approval was given.
- Keep the published version, so an archived page can be produced on request.
A worked example shows how this lands. An Edinburgh investment platform briefs a Glasgow personal finance blog. The blog drafts a piece on ISA transfers, with a table of charges and a link to open an account.
The firm's compliance team checks the table against its current fee schedule, adds a capital-at-risk warning above the table and confirms the ad label reads as paid. The publisher keeps the signed brief, the approved draft and the live URL. When the fee schedule changes, the firm asks for the table to be updated and re-approved.
The publisher has duties of its own. It must disclose the commercial relationship, avoid inventing personal experience, keep claims current and stop promoting a product once the firm withdraws approval. An affiliate disclosure policy removes most of the ambiguity, because it tells publishers exactly what wording and placement the firm expects.
Monitor the live page and keep the records
Monitoring is stage four, and it is where cycles break. Check live pages monthly, and re-approve after any fee, rate or product change. The failure modes are a publisher editing copy after approval and a firm forgetting to withdraw an old post when a product closes.
If a publisher changes copy after approval, approval lapses. The firm should treat the edited version as a new promotion, review it and re-approve before it stays live. A fee table on a Glasgow page that is still showing superseded rates is a live risk, and so is a paid link labelled only in a site footer. Scottish firms should fix both before the next campaign.
Keep the brief, the approved draft, the approval note, the live URL and a dated screenshot. Record keeping should survive staff turnover. Under UK GDPR, personal data collected through affiliate forms needs a lawful basis and a retention period, and the ICO expects both to be documented.
A shared tracker can hold all four stages in one place, which suits firms with small compliance teams.
Check before the link goes live
- Firm status and relevant permissions checked on the FCA Financial Services Register
- Paid link or advertorial label visible without scrolling
- Required risk warning or APR statement placed as the applicable rules require
- Comparison basis and data date stated
- Named approver and approval date recorded
- Archived copy of the published version retained
- Review trigger set for fee or product changes
Common questions
Does the FCA regulate affiliate publishers directly?
Usually not as authorised firms, but section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 can restrict an unauthorised publisher from communicating a financial promotion unless an authorised person approves it or an exemption applies. Publishers also have advertising and disclosure duties.
Who approves an affiliate post about a regulated product?
Where section 21 applies, an authorised person with the relevant permission must approve the promotion unless an exemption applies. The publisher cannot self-approve it merely because it drafted the content.
Do Scottish affiliates need to label every link as paid?
Yes, where the link is commercial. The label must be clear to an ordinary reader, not hidden in a footer or a hover state.
What should an approval note record?
It names the approver, the approver's relevant status, the version approved and the date approval was given. The firm releases the tracking link only after the note exists, and the publisher keeps a copy beside the approved draft and the live URL.
What happens if a publisher changes copy after approval?
Approval lapses. The firm should treat the edited version as a new promotion, review it and re-approve before it stays live.
