UK-Based Law Firm Rebuked by Regulator Over Money Laundering Training
Withers has also been ordered to pay the costs of the Solicitors Regulation Authority's investigation.
March 16, 2020 at 09:52 AM
3 minute read
Top 50 U.K. firm Withers has been rebuked by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) for failing to adequately provide anti-money laundering training to relevant employees.
According to the SRA, the firm "failed to take appropriate measures to ensure that its relevant employees were regularly given training in how to recognize and deal with transactions and other activities or situations which may be related to money laundering or terrorist financing."
The regulator also ordered the firm to pay about $1,650 to cover the costs of its investigation.
According to the SRA decision notice, the firm had taken too long to provide the necessary anti-money laundering training to all relevant employees between June 2017 and October 2019.
When asked by the SRA in November 2018 whether the training was complete, Withers said that its training program was being reviewed and applicable training would be completed.
By the end of 2018, the firm had provided training to approximately two-thirds of the individuals it considers are "relevant employees". The training of the remaining one-third was completed by early October 2019.
The SRA's notice says that Withers admitted that its failure to train all relevant employees within that time frame "amounted to non-compliance with its legal obligations".
The SRA added that a public rebuke was necessary to provide a deterrent to others, but that "there has been no evidence of lasting harm to consumers or third parties, the breach has been remedied and there is a low risk of repetition".
A spokesperson for Withers said in a statement: "In a lengthy dialogue with the SRA, we have accepted that our training program on the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 was not completed by all of our relevant employees in a timely fashion and we thereby failed to comply with our legal obligations under the Regulations. All relevant training has since been completed, alongside a review of our money laundering training program.
"We welcome the SRA's acknowledgement that this breach did not result in any lasting harm to consumers or third parties and that, notwithstanding our delay in training some of our relevant people, we carried out an internal awareness raising program concerning the anti-money laundering legislation.
"We take our obligations concerning anti-money laundering (AML) duties very seriously, and are confident that we have all appropriate measures in place to monitor and recognize any risk factors in relation to money laundering."
In October, the SRA warned that it was going to crack down on money-laundering non-compliance after it found that a fifth of firms were not adhering to its regulations.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFederal Judge Sends Novel Damages Question in Employment Dispute to State Court
5 minute readJudge Rejects Meta’s Plea to Send FTC Antitrust Suit to Trash Heap
County Reps: Appeal Likely Following State Court's Sales Tax Ruling for Retail Marijuana
6 minute readCSX Joins Rest of Big Four Railroad Companies in Installing New Generation of Legal Leadership
Trending Stories
- 1California Implements New Law Banning Medical Debt From Credit Reports
- 2Trump Picks Personal Criminal Defense Lawyers For Solicitor General, Deputy Attorney General
- 3Climate Groups Demonstrate Outside A&O Shearman and Akin Offices
- 4Republican Who Might Become FTC's Next Chair Blasts Democratic Commissioners' 'All Mergers Are Bad' Mindset
- 5The Law Firm Disrupted: It's Bonus Time
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250