Mahfuzur Rahman admitted four matters involving client account payments and conflicts of interest.
Solicitor fined £4,950 over client account banking facility breaches.
Solicitor Mahfuzur Rahman has agreed to a £4,950 fine from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) after admitting breaches involving the use of a law firm’s client account as a banking facility and conflicts of interest.
The regulatory settlement agreement, dated 21 September 2026 and published on 23 September, relates to conduct while Mr Rahman was a solicitor and former employee of Spencer West LLP.
According to the SRA, a forensic investigation found that Mr Rahman had allowed the firm’s client account to be used for payments that did not relate to an underlying legal transaction or a service forming part of the firm’s normal regulated activities.
Some of the transactions also involved payments to companies controlled by Mr Rahman or members of his family. The SRA said this created a significant risk of an own-interest conflict.
The conduct took place between September 2022 and May 2023, across four separate matters. The SRA recorded 18 payments and said the use of the client account continued for eight months.
Mr Rahman admitted that allowing the client account to be used as a banking facility breached Principle 2 of the SRA Principles 2019, which required him to act in a way that upheld public trust and confidence in the profession and legal services.
He also admitted breaching Rule 3.3 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2019, which prohibits client accounts being used to provide banking facilities to clients or third parties. Payments into, transfers from and withdrawals from a client account must relate to the delivery of regulated services.
The settlement also records admissions concerning Paragraph 6.1 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs, relating to own-interest conflicts or significant risks of such conflicts.
The SRA said there was no evidence of client loss, misapplication of funds or a complaint from a client or third party. It also recorded that Mr Rahman had no adverse regulatory history, cooperated with the investigation and presented a low risk of repetition.
The regulator nevertheless considered a fine appropriate because Mr Rahman was an experienced solicitor with direct responsibility for the matters and his conduct showed a disregard for his regulatory obligations concerning client account money. The SRA also said the conduct continued longer than was reasonable and was not rectified until prompted.
The agreed £4,950 penalty was calculated under the SRA’s published financial penalty guidance. The SRA classified the nature of the misconduct as more serious because of its duration, the 18 payments and the pattern involving conflicts of interest. It assessed the impact as low because the funds were moved at the client’s request and the conduct was considered to have had minimal potential loss or impact.
Mr Rahman has also agreed to pay £1,350 in investigation costs and to the publication of the regulatory settlement agreement