header-logo header-logo

04 June 2025
Issue: 8119 / Categories: Legal News , Regulatory , Legal services , Risk management
printer mail-detail

Regulator sanctioned for Axiom Ince failings

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has been given 12 months to improve its safeguarding of risk, intervention and client money, under binding directions issued in response to the Axiom Ince scandal

It must provide quarterly written reports on progress to the Legal Services Board (LSB), and commission independent external auditors within 12 months to evaluate its compliance and identify any other weaknesses.

Catherine Brown, interim chair of the LSB, said: ‘The severity of what happened at Axiom Ince—with £60m in client money missing and 1,400 people losing their jobs—demanded decisive action, and we welcome the SRA’s constructive engagement with us during this statutory process.

‘The directions we've issued are designed to protect the public and better ensure client funds are properly safeguarded.’

The directions, which are binding under the Legal Services Act 2008, require the SRA to ‘revise its regulatory arrangements and guidance to… protect consumers and the public from potential harm arising from a single individual holding more than one role in a firm or other authorised body eg owner, manager, compliance officer for legal practice, compliance officer for finance and administration, and money laundering compliance officer’.

Axiom Ince grew rapidly through a series of mergers and acquisitions before being closed by the SRA in October 2023. The firm’s owner held multiple compliance roles.

The SRA must also ‘ensure firms have effective safeguards to protect client money’ and ‘put in place measures to enable more effective risk-based scrutiny of firms undergoing sale, merger or acquisition’.

The SRA is due to make a decision before the end of this year on whether it will go ahead with its proposals to stop firms handling client money.

Paul Philip, SRA chief executive, said: ‘We have been working over the past months with the LSB on our plan to address and implement its directions.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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