Crypto complaints and redress: what UK professionals should tell clients now

CP26/4 explains how UK complaints handling and Ombudsman access may apply to cryptoasset activities. Here's what professionals should tell clients.

Introduction

For years, a major problem in crypto has been the mismatch between what consumers assume and what redress routes actually exist. CP26/4 tackles this directly by discussing how complaints handling and Ombudsman access might apply — and it flags that this can be confusing for consumers when services are delivered cross-border. Professionals should treat this as a client education priority, because confusion during a crisis (loss, scam, death) is when bad decisions happen.

The core idea: protections depend on 'where' and 'how'

CP26/4 explains that when regulated cryptoasset activities are carried on from a UK establishment, the UK complaints handling framework (including DISP) and access to the Financial Ombudsman can apply in the usual way. It also notes that where an authorised firm does not carry on regulated cryptoasset activities from an establishment in the UK, consumers may not be able to refer complaints to the Ombudsman for those activities, and firms should clearly disclose whether Ombudsman access applies. That's a technical paragraph — but the client-facing point is simple: Before choosing a provider, know what happens if you need help, and what formal routes exist.

What your firm should change in client conversations

1) Add a 'redress check' to your crypto due diligence When clients use exchanges or platforms, ask: • Is the provider UK-established for the relevant activity? • What complaints process applies? • Is Ombudsman access available for that activity? Even if you don't answer those questions, you can train clients to ask them. 2) Explain the difference between 'provider support' and 'legal redress' Clients often assume 'support' equals 'resolution'. It does not. Your best contribution is to frame expectations: support teams can be helpful, but they do not replace documented authority, evidence, and a clear chain of action — particularly after incapacity or death. 3) Prepare clients for the worst day, not the best day When something goes wrong, clients may be: • stressed • time-pressured • vulnerable to 'recovery' scams • unable to access old devices or accounts This is where a documented plan becomes invaluable. Bitzo's model is designed for exactly this: non-custodial documentation and coordination so that, in a crisis, there is a known path and a known set of responsible parties.