Assessment date meaning

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is no longer being maintained This tracker summarises the consultation papers issued by the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) from 2017 onwards, together with the release of any follow‑on rules and guidance. For material on consultation papers from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Financial Services Authority (FSA), see: FCA consultation paper tracker FSA consultation paper tracker Topic area, consultation paper, description, publication date, end of consultation period, and any Policy Statement / Supervisory Statement are recorded. Regulation of insurance 2023 — CP24/23 – Funded reinsurance. This consultation paper outlines proposed expectations for life insurance firms acting as cedants when entering into, or retaining, funded reinsurance arrangements. The PRA’s proposals reflect its assessment that the rising use of funded reinsurance within the UK insurance market presents significant potential risks, including the prospect of unduly concentrated exposures to correlated, credit‑focused counterparties...

A property might: have the benefit of easements capable of exercise over other property, or be subject to easements exercised over the property for the benefit of other property. The land over which an easement is exercised is the servient land. The land enjoying the benefit of an easement is the dominant land. An easement may entitle the owner of the dominant land to: use the servient land (e.g. a right of way), or receive something from the servient land without interference or obstruction (e.g. a right of light, air or support). An easement may require the owner of the servient land to refrain from using the servient land in such a manner as to interfere with the easement, for example: by keeping any right of way over the servient land clear and unobstructed, or by not building on the servient land in such a way as to obstruct the light...

In this issue: Financial sanctions AML, CTF & counter-proliferation financing Economic crime Data protection Other Practice Compliance updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers New and updated content Financial sanctions OFSI updates Enforcement and Monetary Penalties guidance The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) has revised its Enforcement and Monetary Penalties guidance, with most changes focused on chapter 3 covering case assessment. The revision sets out how ‘case factors’ are considered and allocated when scrutinising suspected financial sanctions breaches. Two separate factors have been added: ‘knowledge, intention and reasonable cause to suspect’ and ‘co-operation’. OFSI also notes a change in chapter 6 regarding the delegation of ministerial reviews of monetary penalties. See: LNB News 02/05/2024 20. AML, CTF & counter-proliferation financing The Law Society reports two-fifths of laundered money is through property The Law Society highlights new Europol findings showing that 41% of organised crime networks launder proceeds via...

In this issue: Financial sanctions Other financial crime Other Practice Compliance updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers New and updated content Financial sanctions Navigating the complexities of sanctions compliance in law firms—OFSI’s Legal Services Threat Assessment In April 2025, the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) published its inaugural Legal Services Threat Assessment, as part of a series examining sanctions risks in particular sectors. The report supplies valuable perspective on OFSI’s view of the compliance threats and risks confronting the legal services sector, shining a light on the intricate hurdles the UK profession faces in adhering to financial sanctions. By taking forward OFSI’s recommendations, law firms can strengthen their processes and lessen exposure to sanctions breaches. In a period defined by geopolitical unpredictability and ever more complex sanction regimes, firms must stay alert and act proactively on compliance. See News Analysis: Navigating the complexities of sanctions compliance in law firms—OFSI’s Legal Services Threat...

In this issue: The Pensions Regulator The Pensions Ombudsman Funding and investment Members and benefits Brexit Daily and weekly news alerts New content Dates for your diary Trackers The Pensions Regulator TPR value drive sees DC wind-ups continue and seven pension schemes fined more than £30,000 in total TPR has released its latest compliance and enforcement bulletin for January to June 2024, together with a progress update on last year’s initiative designed to ensure savers in defined contribution (DC) pension schemes benefit from rules that require trustees to undertake a detailed value for members (dVFM) assessment. To date, around 17% of the DC schemes it has engaged with during this value-focused work have judged they do not deliver good value and have chosen to wind up. As the dVFM regime applies to roughly 1,323 DC schemes, if these outcomes were replicated across the wider DC market, the implication is that more than 200 schemes...

Taxpayers who settle tax after the deadline are liable to interest, charged at a rate laid down in law. The Finance Act 2009 (FA 2009) established a unified framework for interest on late-paid tax intended to apply across all taxes, excluding excise duties; corporation tax and petroleum revenue tax were at first outside the framework, but are now slated for inclusion from a date yet to be confirmed. This Practice Note outlines both the unified rules and also covers how interest may arise where late payment falls outside that framework. Harmonised late paid interest regime The FA 2009 framework is being phased in progressively across the different taxes...

Scope of the regime (NSIA 2021) took full effect on 4 January 2022. From that point, the UK Government gained powers to scrutinise and intervene in a broad array of investments in entities operating in the UK, and in purchases of related assets, with the goal of stopping deals that might threaten the UK’s national security. The regime is run by the Investment Security Unit (ISU) within the Cabinet Office, while the formal decision‑maker is the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (described in the Act, and here, as the ‘Secretary of State’). Beyond handling notifications and associated proceedings, the ISU may issue guidance on the regime and how it applies to particular transactions. Under NSIA 2021, certain investments in business entities active across 17 specified UK sectors must be notified to the ISU by the investor and cleared by the Secretary of State before completion. This notification duty applies whether the investor is UK‑based or overseas, and also to investments in foreign entities active in these sectors in...

What is an assessment period? When a qualifying insolvency event affects the sponsoring employer of an eligible scheme, the scheme moves into a Pension Protection Fund (PPF) assessment period as a result of that event. This arises on the occurrence of that event. The day on which that period starts is known as the ‘assessment date’ for the scheme. Since 3 January 2012, the assessment period is no longer required to last for at least 12 months. Throughout the assessment period, the PPF considers whether the scheme satisfies the requirements for entry into the PPF. In particular, the PPF will appoint an actuary to carry out a valuation of the scheme as at the assessment date, in order to determine whether the scheme’s assets are less than the protected liabilities—broadly, the benefits the PPF would pay to members if the scheme were to enter the PPF...

1 General information Report date: [ Enter date ] Previous report date: [ Enter date ] Report submitted by: [ Enter name ] 2 Action points arising from last report Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] 3 Executive summary This report covers the following items: 3.1 overview of business operations; 3.2 account of the operation of competition law compliance systems and controls;...

Notification under the Serious Injury Guide Sent by email to [ insert the early notification contact name and email address as listed for each insurer at http://www.seriousinjuryguide.co.uk/ ] Dear [ insert name ] Ref: Accident Client name: Date of birth: [ to be provided in a separate email ] National Insurance number: [ to be provided in a separate email ] We represent [ insert claimant’s name ] who sustained injuries in an incident on [ insert date ] at around [ insert time ], occurring in the course of their employment as [ insert details OR other circumstances ]...

1 Management commitment Person accountable for the Product Safety Incident Plan (PSIP) [ Insert name and contact details of senior person in the organisation responsible for leading, developing and periodically reviewing the policy, and reporting on its operation to the Board ] Plan Review Date [ Insert date of next plan review ] 1.1 [ Insert organisation name ] aims to ensure every product it [ produces AND/OR distributes ] is safe, of high quality and meets all applicable legislation and standards. [ Insert organisation name ] evaluates those products and acts to remove, or, where that is not achievable, to reduce, any identified safety risks. 1.2 [ Insert organisation name ] achieves this through quality assurance, ongoing product monitoring [ , review of customer complaints and product returns, ] and risk assessment, in accordance with the relevant section of the PSIP. 1.3 The PSIP has been shaped with contributions from across the business, including [ eg design, production, quality assurance, customer services,...

The statutory formula for child maintenance under the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991) The statutory formula for child maintenance under the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991) does not link the amount payable to whether the paying parent has contact with the children, other than insofar as the shared care rules operate. Under CSA 1991, s 3(5), it is recognised that, for the purposes of the Act, there can be more than one person with care in relation to the same qualifying child. The Child Support Maintenance Calculation Regulations 2012, SI 2012/2677, reg 46(2), further provide that any calculation must be grounded in the number of nights the non-resident parent is expected to care for the qualifying child overnight during the 12 months commencing on the effective date of the relevant calculation decision. The Child Maintenance Service (CMS) retains a discretion to take into account a shorter timeframe where appropriate in making that assessment...

Section 2 of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MeHA 1983) Under MeHA 1983, s 2 permits a person to be taken into hospital and kept there once an application for admission for assessment has been properly and lawfully made, the aim being to evaluate their mental health. MeHA 1983, s 3 in turn authorises admission to hospital and continued detention where an application for admission for treatment has been successfully made. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) sets out a number of governing principles which are to be appropriately applied for the purposes of that Act, in connection with its application...

In this Q&A we have assumed: the deceased’s assessment was correctly calculated a typical financial profile (not, for instance, no recourse to public funds) no top-up was due or paid no deprivation the income-based assessment was up to date Charging for a resident assessed as full cost and availing themselves of a deferred payment agreement would normally be as follows: income contribution: income minus personal allowance, per charging cycle remainder (after 12-week disregard) deferred against property Confirm the first was paid. For the second, check overcharging against beneficial interest; the lower capital limit is £14,250, not £23,250. Assessable capital = beneficial interest − 10% − £14,250 (Care and Statutory Support Guidance 8.12). Example: £200,000 interest gives £165,750. Systems may overrun, exceeding assessed capital; if so, reassess and cap recovery at that, with any surplus proceeds kept by the estate. Deprivation or unpaid income are not protected by the lower limit. If the...