Two judgments published in the past five weeks set out how far a compliance officer’s personal responsibility runs when a firm’s client account records fall apart. Neither solicitor was found to have been dishonest.
What did the tribunal decide?
Gordon Mcpherson Keir, an equity partner and both COLP and COFA at Hadgkiss Hughes & Beale, was reprimanded, barred from acting as COFA for 12 months and ordered to pay £39,000 in costs. John William Cruickshank, a sole practitioner at Geoffrey Hill & Co who was also his own COLP and COFA, was suspended for nine months with 12 months of conditions afterwards, and costs of £7,726.50.
| Keir | Cruickshank | |
|---|---|---|
| Role | Equity partner, COLP and COFA | Sole practitioner, COLP and COFA |
| Dishonesty | Withdrawn by the SRA | Not alleged |
| Integrity | Not proved | Admitted lack of integrity |
| Sanction | Reprimand, 12 months barred as COFA | 9 months suspension, then 12 months of conditions |
| Costs | £39,000 | £7,726.50 |
Why was one solicitor only reprimanded?
The SRA withdrew its dishonesty allegation against Mr Keir at the start of his hearing, saying the conduct was better characterised as raising issues of integrity and professional standards. The tribunal then found no lack of integrity either.
He had signed four professional indemnity insurance proposal forms between 2018 and 2022 which wrongly said the firm’s accounts had not been qualified in the previous five years. The tribunal called that a serious lack of care, but held, applying Wingate, that repeated carelessness did not cross into a departure from the profession’s ethical standards. What was proved was that it undermined public trust.
On the accounts, the firm had longstanding residual balance problems flagged in successive qualified accountant’s reports. The tribunal accepted that Mr Keir circulated balance lists to fee earners and chased the issue, but found that the COFA role required more than identifying a problem and relying on others to fix it. There was no written plan, and compliance was not adequately monitored or recorded.
Why did the other get nine months?
Mr Cruickshank’s case differed in scale. No compliant three-way reconciliation had been carried out since January 2022, client ledgers were handwritten and out of date, and no accountant’s report had been obtained since the period ending March 2021. The forensic investigator found an unexplained difference of £591,385.40 between stated client liabilities and funds held, and could not tell whether it was a bookkeeping discrepancy or an actual shortage.
The SRA intervened in October 2024 and recovered £935,104.17 from the client account. By March 2025 the Compensation Fund had received 31 claims connected to the firm, with a likely payout of more than £400,000. He admitted everything, including lack of integrity and recklessness. The tribunal weighed his ill health and an unblemished career across more than 50 years in practice.
What do the cases say about the COFA role?
Read together the two cases give a working checklist. Spotting a problem is not managing it, so a COFA needs a documented plan, monitoring and records. An extension agreed with your reporting accountant does not extend the SRA’s deadline, which needs the regulator’s approval. Paying residual balances to charity needs prior SRA authority, whoever else signed it off. And insurance proposal forms are risk documents, so the same wrong answer across four renewals is misconduct even without dishonesty.
Why does this matter now?
The timing matters. From January 2027, new rule 8.4 will stop anyone who can determine or direct significant management decisions from holding the COLP or COFA role in firms above either financial threshold. Both of these solicitors were owners holding the role themselves.
Frequently asked questions
What does a COFA have to do?
Take all reasonable steps to ensure the firm, its managers and its employees comply with the SRA Accounts Rules. In these cases the tribunal treated that as requiring active oversight, not just raising the issue with colleagues.
Can a COFA be sanctioned without any dishonesty finding?
Yes. Mr Keir faced no dishonesty finding and no finding of lack of integrity, and was still reprimanded, barred from the role for 12 months and ordered to pay £39,000 in costs.
Does an extension from your accountant extend the SRA deadline?
No. The tribunal held that the obligation to obtain the SRA’s approval for an extension remained, even where the delay arose during the pandemic.
Can residual client balances be paid to charity?
Not without prior SRA authority. In the Keir case a payment of £10,868.45 made without that authority was found to breach the Code of Conduct for Firms.