Successful RMCP Review Support
Assisted a law firm through an FIC RMCP review with a successful outcome.
Capitec’s R28 million FICA penalty included R5 million for RMCP deficiencies. With the Directive 12 RMCP submission deadline approaching on 9 October 2026, non-bank credit providers must submit an approved programme that reflects their lending risks and the controls they actually apply.
Watch the briefing below to understand the key areas your RMCP must address to withstand scrutiny.
Our RMCP and inspection support experience informs a practical approach to FICA compliance. For credit providers, the programme must be tailored to lending products, borrower relationships and the institution’s actual controls.
Assisted a law firm through an FIC RMCP review with a successful outcome.
Our RMCP development workflow helps translate FIC Act requirements into documented, practical controls.
Firm-specific RMCPs developed for clients across all nine provinces.
Compliance consultancy led by a Compliance Institute Southern Africa member.
National LSSA Conference · Cape Town · April 2026.
Gauteng SAWLA AGM · April 2026.
The FIC issued final Directive 12 on 4 September 2026. Item 11 credit providers, excluding bank, mutual bank and co-operative bank credit providers, must submit documentation describing their section 42 RMCP to the FIC by 9 October 2026, and annually thereafter.
The Directive excludes bank, mutual bank and co-operative bank credit providers. Final PCC 23A explains the wider item 11 definition.
Submit the approved RMCP through the FIC’s goAML platform. Submission is required annually thereafter.
Address your credit products, client onboarding, risk assessment, monitoring, screening, reporting and records as they operate in practice.
The Prudential Authority imposed a R28 million FICA penalty on Capitec. R5 million concerned section 42 RMCP deficiencies; R500,000 of that amount was conditionally suspended.

| Finding | Penalty |
|---|---|
| RMCP deficiencies | R5 million |
| Customer due diligence | R10 million |
| Enhanced due diligence | R5 million |
| Ongoing due diligence | R5 million |
| Employee training | R3 million |
| Total FICA financial penalty | R28 million |
The Prudential Authority found that Capitec had not obtained management approval for certain screening manuals before using them. It also found gaps in documented and approved terrorist-property reporting processes, and in the RMCP’s policies and controls for terrorist-property reporting and financial sanctions.
Capitec is a bank and is excluded from the item 11 Directive 12 submission group. This sanction illustrates scrutiny of an RMCP under section 42.
Our consultants develop and review credit provider RMCPs against section 42 and the way each lending business operates.
Reflect your products, borrower relationships, repayment channels and geographic reach.
Document the money laundering, terrorist financing and proliferation financing risks your business faces.
Describe the customer due diligence, screening, monitoring, reporting and record keeping you actually perform.
Identify gaps in the approved RMCP before it is submitted to the FIC.
At the LSSA AGM in Cape Town, a consistent theme emerged: firms have a strong willingness to comply, but many face real challenges translating legislative requirements into practical, inspection-ready implementation.
Read article →
What proposed changes to record keeping, technology risks and FIC powers could mean for accountable institutions, including credit providers.
Read article →
Download the original FICA Friendly PDF, based on an inspection involving a law firm. The case study is about legal practice; the broader compliance lessons may be useful to other accountable institutions.
Download free guide →Discuss an RMCP that reflects your lending products, borrower relationships and the controls your business uses in practice.