(unnamed respondent)

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

Scott-Moncrieff and Associates Limited, an ABS/licensed body, appealed an SRA Adjudicator's decision (upheld by an SRA Adjudication Panel) that had found AML failings (Allegation 1) and misuse of the client account as a banking facility (Allegation 2) proven, imposing a £68,000 fine and £1,350 investigation costs. The firm accepted Allegation 1 but challenged the Rule 3.3 finding and the proportionality/level of the penalty, arguing its atypical ABS profit-sharing structure and low proportion of in-scope work warranted a different, lower metric and that Allegation 3 (not proven) should have reduced the fine. The Tribunal, conducting a review, found the Adjudicator applied the correct legal framework, properly considered exceptionality, harm and mitigation, and exercised discretion within reasonable bounds. No dishonesty was alleged or found. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety and the firm ordered to pay the Respondent's appeal costs of £12,211.

Duties found breached:

• No improper use of client money
• Firm governance, systems and compliance

Aggravating factors:

• Long-standing and serious misconduct continuing over several years
• Failure to heed SRA guidance and warning notices
• Significant compliance steps taken only after SRA involvement
• Large sums (over $22 million) passed through client account without query
• Lack of insight and absence of remorse

Mitigating factors:

• Conduct confined to one client matter, limiting impact of the Accounts Rules breach
• Firm eventually became largely compliant with the FWRA/PCPs