Clyde & Co: highest fine for firm

City firm Clyde & Co has been fined £50,000 – the largest penalty issued against a law firm – and three of its partners £10,000 each for allowing its client account to be used as a banking facility and breaching anti-money laundering rules.

A notice from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), published today, said the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made the ruling last month after considering an application to approve an agreed outcome in relation to the firm and Christoper Duffy, Simon Gamblin and Nicholas Purnell.

Agreed outcomes are becoming more common in cases where SRA-approved regulatory settlement agreements are insufficient as they are limited to the SRA’s power to rebuke and fine up to £2,000.

They admitting allowing the firm’s client bank account to be used as a banking facility, and failing to act in accordance with their obligations under the Money Laundering Regulations 2007.

Further, the firm, Mr Duffy and Mr Purnell admitted that they failed to heed the guidance in the Law Society’s fraudulent financial arrangements warning and/or the warning notice on money laundering, “in that they acted as escrow agent in transactions on behalf of a client, that had the hallmarks of dubious financial arrangements or investment schemes”.

Clyde & Co also admitted that it failed to have in place adequate procedures to deal with dormant client balances.

The full ruling will be published in a few weeks.

In a statement, Clyde & Co said: “We hold ourselves to the highest professional and ethical standards and take responsibility for ensuring we meet them.

“We acknowledge that in three matters that occurred in 2013 and prior, we did not meet those high standards and the firm and three of its partners did act in breach of the SRA accounts rules and the Money Laundering Regulations, which also led to breaches of certain SRA principles and code.

“We believe it to be clear, and the SRA does not dispute, that any mistakes made were honest and inadvertent. It is not alleged that the firm or the three partners lacked integrity, probity or trustworthiness, or laundered or misappropriated money.

“We have worked constructively with our regulator and we are confident that the circumstances which led to these breaches could not happen again. We have since reviewed and strengthened a number of aspects of our approach to risk management.”

In 2013, London practice Fuglers was also fined a record £50,000 and its two equity partners £25,000 between them for allowing Portsmouth Football Club to use its client account as a banking facility to service its day-to-day trading activities, a decision upheld by the High Court.

The highest fine for an individual is £305,000, handed out in 2015 to a solicitor who was found to have taken advantage of an elderly client.


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

The working practices of property lawyers have changed little since the 19th century. Many aspects of the conveyancing process remain offline – documents are still on paper and the data entered manually. The commercial transaction process is laborious, slow and… Read More

Blog

20 June 2018

New tech on the block: what you need to know about blockchain

Blockchain. It’s been branded as the future of just about everything, and is soon expected to infiltrate all aspects of how we live our lives from banking, to tax returns to voting. But what is it, and how can it be used in property transactions?

Read More

18 June 2018

Surely no one would do this?

It’s slightly tongue-in-cheek, but let’s see if we can design a business model that is doomed to struggle and which will ensure that we miss out on the profit and cash opportunities that come with providing high-value services at high prices in a near-monopoly situation.

Read More