Restrictions prevent solicitor from holding client money or acting as COLP or COFA
SRA practising certificate conditions have been imposed on solicitor John Talbot, restricting his ability to hold client money or act in senior compliance roles within authorised legal practices.
According to a regulatory decision published on 13 February 2026, the conditions were imposed as a control of practice measure following an SRA decision dated 17 December 2025. The outcome relates to Mr Talbot’s practising certificate for the 2024–2025 practising period.
Under the terms of the decision, Mr Talbot is prohibited from acting as a manager or owner of any authorised body. He is also prevented from serving as a compliance officer for legal practice (COLP) or as a compliance officer for finance and administration (COFA), roles that carry responsibility for regulatory compliance and financial oversight within law firms.
The conditions further restrict Mr Talbot from holding or receiving client money, acting as a signatory to any client or office account, or authorising transfers from such accounts. In addition, he may not practise on his own account under the relevant provisions of the SRA Authorisation of Individuals Regulations.
The SRA stated that the conditions were necessary in the public interest and were considered reasonable and proportionate. The regulator confirmed that the decision was made having regard to the purposes set out in regulation 7 of the SRA Authorisation of Individuals Regulations, as well as the regulatory objectives and principles governing regulatory activity under section 28 of the Legal Services Act 2007.
Control of practice conditions are commonly used where the regulator considers that risks can be managed through targeted restrictions rather than suspension or more serious disciplinary action. Such measures allow a solicitor to continue practising, typically within defined limits, while addressing concerns identified by the regulator.
The published decision does not set out the underlying factual background to the restrictions, beyond confirming that the conditions were considered necessary in the public interest.
The outcome reflects the SRA’s continued use of practising certificate conditions as a supervisory tool aimed at protecting client money and maintaining public confidence in legal services, while ensuring that regulatory intervention remains proportionate to the risks identified.