header-logo header-logo

Money laundering crackdown

30 October 2019
Issue: 7862 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory , Criminal , Fraud , Legal services
printer mail-detail
Poor processes open the door to money launderers, warns SRA

One in five law firms is failing to comply with anti-money laundering rules, regulators have warned.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) asked 400 firms for their risk assessments, to assess whether they were complying with the Money Laundering Regulations 2017. However, 83 of the firms (21%) were not compliant. They either did not address all the risk areas required (43), or they sent over something other than a firm risk assessment (40), such as a client or matter risk assessment.

The majority of firms (64%) were using templates, and their risk assessments were generally of lower quality. The SRA said that, while templates can be helpful, too many firms take a ‘copy and paste’ approach, without thinking through the specific risks and issues faced by their firm.

The SRA also expressed concern that 135 of the risk assessments (38%) were dated recently, suggesting some firms may have created one in response to the SRA’s request rather than having one already made.

Consequently, the SRA is now writing to all 7,000 firms affected by the regulations to ask them to confirm they have a firm risk assessment in place. It aims to carry out an ‘extensive programme of targeted, in-depth visits’ to firms to ensure the profession is complying with the rules.

Paul Philip, SRA chief executive, said: ‘Money laundering supports criminal activity such as people trafficking, drug smuggling and terrorism.

‘The damage money laundering does to society means that every solicitor must be fully committed to preventing it. The vast majority would never intend to get involved in criminal activities, but poor processes open the door to money launderers. A call from us should not be the prompt for a firm to get their act together.

‘You need to take immediate action now if you are not on top of your money laundering risks. Where we have serious concerns, we will take strong action.’

The SRA’s annual Risk Outlook, published this week, shows it has opened 172 anti-money laundering compliance investigations already this year. In the past five years, the SRA has taken more than 60 such cases to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, and more than 40 solicitors have been struck-off or suspended as a result.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll