Solicitor fined £15,000 fine for AML due diligence failures


AML: Transactions had several unusual features

A partner who failed to conduct proper client due diligence (CDD) in property transactions that had signs of money laundering has been fined £15,000.

Kalwant Chauhan (known as Tony), a commercial property partner at London firm Bowling & Co, was sanctioned for his conduct when acting in five conveyancing transactions between April 2017 and May 2019.

“Owing to a lack of CDD, it was unclear who Mr Chauhan’s client was in each of the completed transactions,” the SRA said in a notice last week. “He took instructions from an individual who directed the transactions but was not a formal party to them.”

All the transactions had “unusual features” and signs of money laundering, including payments for the purchase price being made directly into the firm’s client account by third parties “with no logical connection to the transaction, including a payment from abroad by a person in a country Mr Chauhan identified as high risk for money laundering”.

There was also a back-to-back property transaction with the asset rapidly changing value, while payment for part of the purchase price of one transaction was made directly between the buyer and seller and not to the firm.

There was a transaction where the source of funds was a loan from a non-institutional lender, and one where the money was provided by one company but title to the property was registered in the name of another.

The SRA said Mr Chauhan failed to conduct adequate CDD and ongoing anti-money laundering and risk assessment checks.

He also did not undertake adequate checks on third parties sending funds or on how they had obtained the funds and he failed to maintain proper files or documentation about the transactions.

These failures “left the firm vulnerable to the risk of money laundering”, the SRA said “and had the potential to cause harm to the public interest and to public confidence in the legal profession”.




Blog


Why law firms are getting AI supervision wrong

The profession’s response to AI supervision failures misunderstands the nature of LLM output – there needs to be for a shift in the culture.


Beyond the PII premium – rethinking risk

Professional indemnity insurance renewal is often treated as an annual pricing exercise. But it is also a chance to show how effectively you identify, manage and mitigate risk.


The AI governance gap in law firms and why it matters now

A third of law firms are already using AI tools with no formal policy in place to govern how AI gets used, what data goes into it, or who’s accountable when something goes wrong.


Loading animation