header-logo header-logo

26 February 2009
Categories: Legal News , Regulatory , Other practice areas
printer mail-detail

Money laundering burden increases

Regulation

A Law Society review into how solicitors’ firms have implemented the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 found two-thirds of solicitors felt supported by the Law Society in meeting their obligations. Most firms have updated their policies and procedures and trained the majority of staff in the new requirements. However, practitioners also said they faced too much red tape.
The review found:
 64% said the greatest deterrent for use of the reliance provisions was the fact they remained criminally liable for any omissions committed by the person they relied on;
 43% found it difficult to find enough information to apply simplified due diligence;
 a third of respondents had turned down a retainer from an exposed person, due to the perceived risk of the client; and
 there was a general perception that costs have increased since the introduction of the 2007 Regulations.
Alison Matthews, chairman of the Law Society’s Money Laundering Task Force says: “We see these results as a useful starting point to generate discussions about how we can work together with the profession.”

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll