MPs Demand Inquiry Into FCA’s Treatment of Whistleblower Simon Andriesz After His Death
A cross-party group of MPs has called for an inquiry into the Financial Conduct Authority’s treatment of whistleblowers after the death of Simon Andriesz, the British former Wall Street executive who publicly accused US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick of failing to disclose his business relationship with the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The all-party parliamentary group on investment fraud and fairer financial services said the death of the 57-year-old had raised “deeply troubling questions” about how the City regulator handled his repeated appeals for help, according to The Times.
Andriesz, who was previously a managing director at BGC Group, the Wall Street brokerage where Lutnick was chief executive, was found dead last week. The Banker first reported that he died by apparent suicide. Andy Agathangelou, founder of the Transparency Task Force, a financial-services campaign group with which Andriesz was involved, confirmed the death to The Times. No official cause of death has been publicly released.
The MPs said Andriesz had asked for assistance from senior FCA figures because “he believed the retaliation against him was escalating and he and his family were in crisis”. They alleged the regulator ignored his “repeated appeals” and later acknowledged it was wrong to advise him that he had lost whistleblower protection because his identity had become known.
John McDonnell, the Labour MP who chairs the MPs’ group, said: “Simon Andriesz’s death is a profound and preventable tragedy. Our thoughts are with his family, friends and everyone who knew and supported him.” He added that Andriesz “believed he had done what society asks of responsible citizens and professionals: he spoke up when he believed he had encountered serious wrongdoing. He then spent years asking the regulator to listen to his concerns and help protect him and his family from what he believed was retaliation.”
Andriesz spent about 35 years in financial markets. After the US Justice Department released millions of Epstein-related files, he searched them and identified a 2018 email chain in which Epstein and Lutnick discussed plans for a startup business, the Adfin digital-advertising company, according to the BBC. The correspondence appeared to contradict Lutnick’s public account that he had cut ties with Epstein after meeting him in 2005.
He took his allegations to the FBI in 2020 and 2021, according to his own account, and shared his findings with the House Oversight Committee ahead of Lutnick’s closed-door appearance before the panel in May. The BBC told his story in a File on 4 Investigates broadcast in July. He also received a $420,000 whistleblower award from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission for separate disclosures.
Andriesz told the BBC that the personal consequences of speaking out were devastating, describing retaliation that damaged his career, his health and his family. He was sharply critical of the FCA, which he believed had failed to protect him.
Lutnick has denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. He told the House Oversight Committee he had done nothing wrong or inappropriate. He later acknowledged that he had visited Epstein’s private island in 2012, describing the visit as lasting about an hour and calling it “brief, meaningless and inconsequential”. The Commerce Department told the BBC there was no evidence of wrongdoing on Lutnick’s part, and Lutnick has condemned Epstein’s conduct and expressed support for his victims. The BBC has reported that Lutnick has not been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein’s crimes. BGC has denied retaliating against Andriesz.
No reporting to date has linked Andriesz’s death to Lutnick, BGC, Epstein or his disclosures.
Analysis: Why It Matters
This story sits at the intersection of three fault lines: whistleblower protection, regulatory accountability, and the still-unspooling consequences of the Epstein scandal.
The FCA is the gatekeeper of conduct standards in Britain’s financial sector, and its whistleblowing regime is supposed to be a shield for insiders who expose wrongdoing. The MPs’ central claim is that this shield failed in practice: even after the regulator reportedly conceded it had wrongly told Andriesz his protection had lapsed, no practical help reached a man who said he was in crisis. That distinction — between being technically right about procedure and actually protecting a human being — is what the proposed inquiry would have to examine.
The picture is not one-sided. The Financial Conduct Authority’s Complaints Commissioner has previously examined the case and did not uphold the complaint points, while recording that Andriesz’s disclosures materially affected the FCA’s supervision of the firm. That record complicates any simple claim that nobody acted. But an apology over wording and evidence of supervisory follow-up do not answer the human question at the centre of the MPs’ complaint: what support reached the person who supplied the information, while he was asking for it?
There is also a political dimension the MPs will find hard to separate. Andriesz’s evidence went to a US congressional committee about a sitting American cabinet secretary. The BBC’s July broadcast and his subsequent advocacy turned a regulatory grievance into a transatlantic political story. McDonnell’s intervention, whatever its merits, therefore lands in Westminster at a moment when every Epstein-related revelation still detonates.
What to watch next: whether the parliamentary group formalises its inquiry call into a concrete investigation; what response, if any, the FCA issues to the MPs’ letter; and what a coroner’s inquest establishes about the circumstances of Andriesz’s death, which currently remain unconfirmed in any official record.
If you are struggling with difficult thoughts, Samaritans offers free, confidential support in the UK and Ireland around the clock on 116 123.