meta_id 3089704

On April 22, 2026, the Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA) sent a "Dear CEO" letter to all licensed investment firms in Malta. The letter outlined key findings and supervisory expectations following a thematic review of complaints-handling processes. During 2025, the MFSA conducted an outcomes-based thematic review among a number of licensed entities, assessing the extent to which investment firms are adhering to the complaint-handling requirements set out in Section 6 of Chapter 4 of the Conduct of Business Rulebook (CoBR). The letter outlines the MFSA’s key findings from the thematic review and its expectations of investment firms. It provides guidance and examples of good practice to help firms enhance the effectiveness, transparency and overall governance of their complaint-handling processes. The MFSA’s key findings covered areas such as: Complaints management function: the MFSA found that, in many instances, the person responsible for managing the complaints process was a senior official, which could create a conflict of interest. The MFSA also found that some firms had neither designated a specific individual nor outlined how internal communication channels would operate, thereby making it difficult for staff to easily identify and contact the responsible person. The MFSA expects all investment firms to clearly identify the individual(s) responsible for complaint management in their policies and procedures. These policies must be readily accessible to all relevant staff at all times. Firms must also ensure that the designation of the responsible individual is kept up to date and amended promptly whenever changes occur. The MFSA expects all investment firms to clearly identify the individual(s) responsible for complaint management in their policies and procedures. These policies must be readily accessible to all relevant staff at all times. Firms must also ensure that the designation of the responsible individual is kept up to date and amended promptly whenever changes occur. Registration of complaints: the MFSA found that complaints recorded in the complaints register were received directly by the firm’s employees. However, the policy and procedures did not establish a formal process for managing such complaints or identify the official responsible for handling complaints within the firm. The MFSA expects investment firms to establish clear and proportionate internal procedures that distinguish between matters requiring formal treatment and those that do not. The complaints register must also include the granular information required by the compliance function to conduct trend analysis and identify root causes, which should eventually be addressed to improve the customer experience. The MFSA expects investment firms to establish clear and proportionate internal procedures that distinguish between matters requiring formal treatment and those that do not. The complaints register must also include the granular information required by the compliance function to conduct trend analysis and identify root causes, which should eventually be addressed to improve the customer experience. Internal follow-up of complaints and root cause analysis: the MFSA noted that the submitted policies did not comprehensively outline how complaint-handling data would be analysed to identify and address recurring or systemic issues, and that most investment firms had not established a tailored root cause analysis framework. The MFSA expects investment firms to conduct a comprehensive root cause analysis of all complaints received, regardless of volume or type. This analysis must go beyond simple categorisation and identify the underlying drivers, systemic weaknesses, process gaps or operational issues contributing to recurring complaints. The MFSA expects investment firms to conduct a comprehensive root cause analysis of all complaints received, regardless of volume or type. This analysis must go beyond simple categorisation and identify the underlying drivers, systemic weaknesses, process gaps or operational issues contributing to recurring complaints. As part of the review, the MFSA identified several good market practices, including: Having a dedicated section within policies and procedures that outlines the regulatory requirements applicable to different jurisdictions for firms that conduct substantial cross-border activities. Having a dedicated section in the complaints register indicating the country of origin of each complaint. This enhances transparency and enables better monitoring of trends and issues across different jurisdictions. The MFSA expects firms to conduct a comprehensive gap analysis of their own practices and processes, and then take prompt action to address any shortcomings to enhance their complaint-handling processes.