Tag Archives: regulatory defensibility

Series Wrap-Up: Reconstructing Time, Truth, and Trust in UK Financial Services Data Platforms

Leave a Reply

This series explored how UK Financial Services data platforms can preserve temporal truth, reconstruct institutional belief, and withstand regulatory scrutiny at scale. Beginning with foundational concepts such as SCD2 and event modelling, it developed into a comprehensive architectural pattern centred on an audit-grade Bronze layer, non-SCD Silver consumption, and point-in-time defensibility. Along the way, it addressed operational reality, governance, cost, AI integration, and regulatory expectations. This final article brings the work together, offering a structured map of the series and a coherent lens for understanding how modern, regulated data platforms actually succeed. Taken together, this body of work describes what I refer to as a “land it early, manage it early” data platform architecture for regulated industries.

Continue reading →

The 2026 UK Financial Services Lakehouse Reference Architecture

Leave a Reply

An opinionated but practical blueprint for regulated, temporal, multi-domain data platforms: focused on authority, belief, and point-in-time defensibility. This article lays out a reference architecture for UK FS in 2026: not as a rigid blueprint, but as a description of what “good” now looks like in banks, insurers, payments firms, wealth platforms, and capital markets organisations operating under FCA/PRA supervision.

Continue reading →

Why Transactions Are Events, Not Slowly Changing Dimensions

Leave a Reply

This article argues that modelling transactions as slowly changing dimensions is a fundamental category error in financial data platforms. Transactions are immutable events that occur once and do not change; what evolves is the organisation’s interpretation of them through enrichment, classification, and belief updates. Applying SCD2 logic to transactions conflates fact with interpretation, corrupts history, and undermines regulatory defensibility. By separating immutable event records from mutable interpretations, platforms become clearer, auditable, and capable of reconstructing past decisions without rewriting reality.

Continue reading →

Authority, Truth, and Belief in Financial Services Data Platforms

Leave a Reply

Financial services data architectures often fail by asking the wrong question: “Which system is the system of record?” This article argues that regulated firms operate with multiple systems of authority, while truth exists outside systems altogether. What data platforms actually manage is institutional belief: what the firm believed at a given time, based on available evidence. By separating authority, truth, and belief, firms can build architectures that preserve history, explain disagreement, and withstand regulatory scrutiny through accountable, reconstructable decision-making.

Continue reading →

Networks, Relationships & Financial Crime Graphs on the Bronze Layer

Leave a Reply

Financial crime rarely appears in isolated records; it emerges through networks of entities, relationships, and behaviours over time. This article explains why financial crime graphs must be treated as foundational, temporal structures anchored near the Bronze layer of a regulated data platform. It explores how relationships are inferred, versioned, and governed, why “known then” versus “known now” matters, and how poorly designed graphs undermine regulatory defensibility. Done correctly, crime graphs provide explainable, rebuildable network intelligence that stands up to scrutiny years later.

Continue reading →