Tribunal fines Newaz and Masood over mishandled client funds and banking facility breaches.
Two solicitors have been fined thousands of pounds after admitting to serious misconduct involving the mishandling of client funds and failures in anti-money laundering checks.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) ruled on 13 February 2023 that Ali Newaz and Aamer Masood committed multiple breaches while working on property transactions between 2018 and 2019.
The tribunal heard that Newaz, the sole principal of his firm as well as its Compliance Officer for Legal Practice, Finance and Administration, and Money Laundering Reporting Officer, failed to ensure client funds were returned promptly once there was no legitimate reason to hold them. Between October 2018 and June 2019, he also authorised payments from a property sale at 7A Oxxxx Terrace that effectively allowed the firm to operate as a banking facility, in breach of the Solicitors Accounts Rules.
The tribunal found that these lapses demonstrated a failure to run the practice with proper governance, financial oversight, and risk management.
Embed from Getty ImagesMeanwhile, Masood, who worked on the same property matters, admitted that he failed to conduct adequate client due diligence and ongoing anti-money laundering checks on two sales — 7A Oxxxx Terrace and 12 Cxxxx Avenue. He too authorised the retention of client funds far longer than necessary and initiated payments that amounted to providing a banking facility.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) had initially alleged that Masood acted recklessly or with manifest incompetence, but it later withdrew that charge. Both men, however, admitted to the underlying misconduct.
The tribunal noted that both solicitors had made full admissions and that their actions were supported by evidence. It described Newaz’s conduct as “moderately serious” and Masood’s as “more serious”, though still at the lowest end of that scale.
In determining sanction, the SDT considered aggravating and mitigating factors. The breaches involved clear risks to client money and public trust in solicitors, but there was no evidence of dishonesty. Both respondents had cooperated with the proceedings and accepted responsibility.
The tribunal also expressed concern over procedural delays in the case. The SRA was criticised for failing to submit an application for an Agreed Outcome on time, despite admissions having been made months earlier. Counsel for the SRA admitted the handling was “unsatisfactory” and apologised directly to the tribunal. Despite this, the panel agreed it would be unfair to the respondents to proceed to a full hearing, and it approved the Agreed Outcome.
In its final order, the tribunal fined Ali Newaz £5,000 and ordered him to pay £9,722.50 in costs. Aamer Masood received a higher penalty, with a £7,501 fine and £12,500 in costs.
The judgment was anonymised to protect the identities of clients and associated third parties, but the tribunal stressed that the sanctions reflected the seriousness of the breaches. Chair R Nicholas emphasised that the profession’s reputation depends on strict compliance with rules designed to safeguard client money and prevent misuse of law firms as financial conduits.
The decision serves as a warning that solicitors who fail to carry out basic safeguards on client transactions — particularly in property sales — face significant financial penalties and lasting damage to their professional record.