What is a Regulatory Interview Under Caution?
A regulatory interview under caution is a formal stage in a criminal investigation conducted by a regulatory body. The formal caution, which must be administered before questioning begins, signals that the interviewer suspects a criminal offence has been committed and that the interview may form part of the evidence base for a prosecution. It carries the same legal significance as an interview under caution conducted by the police.
Regulatory bodies with the power to conduct interviews under caution include the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the Environment Agency, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), local authority Trading Standards and environmental health teams, the Food Standards Agency, and NHS Counter-Fraud. In each case, the interview is conducted under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) framework.
The Caution
Before questioning begins, the investigator must administer the formal caution: "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence." If the caution is omitted, the interview may be inadmissible in subsequent proceedings.
The right to silence applies; adverse inferences can be drawn from a failure to mention facts later relied upon; and the recording of the interview is a permanent evidential record.
Why the Interview Matters
A regulatory interview is often the most important single stage in the pre-charge process — it is the primary opportunity to provide a substantive response to the allegations, to identify weaknesses in the regulator's evidence, and to put forward contextual information or mitigation that may affect the decision whether to prosecute.
It is also a stage at which significant harm can be done if the interview is not properly managed. Admissions, inconsistencies, or the disclosure of information the regulator did not previously have can all affect the outcome.
Corporate Representatives and Personal Liability
Where a company is under investigation, the company must nominate an individual — typically a director or senior manager — to answer questions on its behalf under section 33 of the Criminal Justice Act 1925. This creates a specific risk: the nominated individual may be asked questions that relate not only to the company's conduct but to their own personal actions. The individual is not obliged to answer questions that would require them to self-incriminate personally.
Managing the distinction between corporate and personal capacity, and ensuring that the nominated representative does not inadvertently accept personal liability for the company's failings, requires careful pre-interview preparation and specialist legal advice.
Advance Disclosure and Preparation
Before the interview takes place, a solicitor can seek advance disclosure from the investigating authority of the evidence it holds and the allegations it intends to put. While regulators are not always required to provide full pre-interview disclosure, obtaining as much information as possible in advance is essential to preparing an effective response. In some cases, regulators will allow questions to be answered in writing rather than in a face-to-face interview.
After the Interview
The period after a regulatory interview — while the investigating body considers its findings — is an important window for further engagement. Representations can be submitted to the regulator addressing specific allegations, providing additional evidence, or arguing that prosecution is not in the public interest. Where an out-of-court disposal is available, this may be the appropriate moment to propose one.