Solicitor Asghar Ali barred from senior roles for third year under SRA conditions

SRA imposes conditions on Asghar Ali’s practising certificate for the third consecutive year

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has again imposed strict controls on the practice of Bolton solicitor Asghar Ali, marking the third consecutive year in which his practising certificate has been subject to conditions. The latest decision, dated 14 July 2025 and published on 22 September 2025, applies to his 2024/2025 practising certificate and restricts his ability to hold senior positions or handle client money.

Ali, a solicitor at AA Solicitors Ltd, based on St Helens Road in Bolton, is prohibited from acting as a manager or owner of any authorised body or non-SRA regulated firm. The regulator has also barred him from taking on compliance responsibilities, including roles as a Compliance Officer for Legal Practice (COLP) or Compliance Officer for Finance and Administration (COFA). He cannot serve as Head of Legal Practice or Head of Finance and Administration in any authorised non-SRA firm.

In addition, Ali is not permitted to practise as a freelance solicitor offering reserved or unreserved legal services on his own account. The SRA has further restricted his ability to hold or receive client money, act as a signatory to client or office accounts, or authorise electronic transfers. Instead, he may work only as an employed solicitor within an authorised body, and any such role must be pre-approved by the regulator.

The decision follows a consistent regulatory pattern. Ali’s practising certificate was made subject to similar conditions in March 2023 and again in March 2024. On each occasion, the SRA cited the need to act in the public interest and maintain confidence in the regulatory system. The regulator has stressed that these measures are both reasonable and proportionate, given its statutory objectives under the Legal Services Act 2007.

In its published findings, the SRA explained that the restrictions are intended to mitigate risks associated with governance, compliance, and financial management. By removing Ali from positions of control and oversight, the regulator has sought to prevent potential harm to clients and uphold public trust in the profession.

The repeated imposition of conditions signals the SRA’s ongoing concerns about Ali’s suitability to occupy positions of senior responsibility. While the regulator has not published detailed reasons beyond citing the public interest, the continuation of restrictions over three successive practising years indicates that the issues identified have not been resolved to the SRA’s satisfaction.

The Legal Services Act requires regulators to prioritise consumer protection, promote competition in the provision of legal services, and ensure that the legal profession operates with integrity. The restrictions on Ali’s certificate reflect the SRA’s application of those principles in practice, using its powers to impose targeted conditions where necessary to protect the public.

The publication of the decision also serves a transparency function. The SRA has confirmed that regulatory outcomes are made public unless specific factors make publication inappropriate, and none of those factors applied in Ali’s case. As a result, the decisions affecting him have been formally recorded and are visible in the regulator’s register.

Ali remains entitled to practise as a solicitor within the defined limits but cannot take sole responsibility for a firm, oversee compliance or finance, or control client money. Unless the SRA removes or varies the restrictions in the future, his professional activities will remain tightly controlled.

For now, the conditions demonstrate the SRA’s willingness to intervene repeatedly and firmly where it considers regulatory objectives are at stake. Ali’s case stands as an example of how the regulator can apply successive restrictions to maintain safeguards in the public interest.