Broadridge research finds legacy FCA rules undermine customer understanding

The clearest finding is also the most alarming: most customers think they get the message, but they don’t. Broadridge’s study found only 15% of people answered core questions correctly after reading the control communications, yet more than 80% believed the notes were clear. That mismatch matters because false confidence can lead to inaction or poor choices. According to Broadridge, legacy Financial Conduct Authority disclosure rules and rigid templates are partly to blame, trapping firms in boxes that make messages harder to understand. For anyone who writes customer letters, the takeaway is simple: don’t trust perceived clarity, measure real comprehension.

What reimagined communications look and feel like

When communications were redesigned using behavioural science principles, comprehension more than doubled. The revamped versions used clearer structure, focused headlines, and plain-language explanations, small sensory shifts that make text feel lighter and less intimidating. Broadridge’s trial shows that swapping dense wording for personalised, concrete examples actually changes behaviour: people are better at grasping the consequences of doing nothing. If your firm is wrestling with compliance versus clarity, this shows there’s a middle path that keeps regulators happy and customers informed.

Personalised numbers: the single biggest boost

Numbers have weight when they’re about you. The study highlights that personalised numerical examples produced the largest uplift in understanding: comprehension of consequences of inaction climbed from 32% to 59%. That’s not just a stat to trot out in board meetings , it’s a practical design rule. Use customer-specific figures, show the impact visually where possible, and put the call to action next to the personal sum. According to the research, that’s how you move people from nodding along to actually acting.

The governance squeeze, why comms teams need better tools

Senior communications leaders told Broadridge they feel squeezed between compliance demands and the desire to be helpful. Prescriptive legacy requirements, rigid templates and governance complexity all make improvement slow and risky. The report recommends creating specialist teams for communications standards, equipping them with the right roles and tools, and tracking outcomes consistently. In practice that means investing in a governance model that balances regulatory adherence with ongoing testing and iteration , think small experiments that prove what works.

What regulators and firms should do next

Broadridge argues for action on three fronts: continue to press for regulatory reform to remove conflicting legacy rules, apply behavioural frameworks within current rules, and invest strategically in communications governance. Regulators like the FCA should be encouraged to identify and remove requirements that unnecessarily hinder clarity, while firms should adopt a test-and-learn approach to customer letters. The upside is tangible: improved customer experience, stronger brand metrics and lower costs , and for early movers, a competitive advantage.

It’s a small change that can make every communication safer and more useful.

For more on Vulnerability, check out the Vulnerability Track at Credit Week- Click here for more