Caisson Turner Legal Services fined after SRA finds prolonged failures in AML risk assessments
A Newcastle-based law practice has been fined by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) after admitting long-running failures to comply with anti-money laundering record-keeping requirements.
Caisson Turner Legal Services, a recognised sole practitioner based at Alderman Fenwicks House, 98–100 Pilgrim Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 6SQ, entered into a regulatory settlement agreement with the SRA dated 3 February 2026. The outcome was published on 5 February 2026.
Under the agreement, the firm was fined £1,596 and ordered to pay £600 towards the SRA’s investigation costs. The firm also agreed to the publication of the decision. The outcome was reached by agreement and concludes the regulator’s investigation.
The investigation followed a review by the SRA’s AML Proactive Supervision team. That review identified concerns about the firm’s compliance with the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017, as well as the SRA’s regulatory frameworks in force both before and after November 2019.
According to the SRA, between 26 June 2017 and July 2025, the firm failed to maintain records of its client and matter risk assessments, as required under Regulation 28 of the 2017 regulations. As a result, the firm was unable to demonstrate that the measures it had taken to meet its AML obligations were appropriate, contrary to Regulation 28(16).
The firm admitted the breaches, which the SRA accepted. For conduct up to 24 November 2019, the admissions included breaches of Principles 6 and 8 of the SRA Principles 2011 and failures to achieve Outcomes 7.2 and 7.5 of the SRA Code of Conduct 2011. For conduct continuing from 25 November 2019 onwards, the firm admitted breaches of Principle 2 of the SRA Principles 2019 and paragraphs 2.1(a) and 3.1 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms 2019.
In deciding that a financial penalty was appropriate, the SRA took account of mitigating factors. These included the absence of evidence of harm to consumers or third parties, a low risk of repetition, steps taken by the firm to rectify the failings, and cooperation with the SRA’s AML supervision and investigation teams. The firm has since ensured that all files within the scope of the regulations include a completed client and matter risk assessment.
However, the regulator said the conduct demonstrated a disregard for statutory and regulatory obligations and had the potential to facilitate money laundering or terrorist financing. The SRA noted that the firm did not fully comply with its AML record-keeping obligations until July 2025, more than eight years after the regulations came into effect.
Applying its published guidance, the SRA assessed the nature of the misconduct as more serious, while the impact of harm or risk of harm was assessed as low. This placed the penalty within Band B. The final fine reflected a reduction to account for the mitigation identified.
The SRA confirmed that publication of the agreement was in the public interest and necessary to maintain transparency and public confidence in the regulation of legal services.