Holden, Peter Edward—125263

Decisions

To view the decision against this individual, click the decision below.

Prosecution—8 December 2015


Decision - prosecution

Outcome: Referral to Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

Outcome date: 8 December 2015

Published date: 9 October 2017

Firm details

Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Thompson & Cooke Limited

Address(es):12 Stamford Street, Stalybridge, Cheshire, SK15 1LA

Firm ID: 566527

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Reasons/basis

This notification relates to a Decision to prosecute before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. This is an independent Tribunal which will reach its own decision after considering all the evidence, including any evidence put forward by the Solicitor. The Tribunal has certified that there is a case to answer in respect of allegations which are or include that he:

1. While in practice as a Partner at and/or a Director of Thompson & Cooke Limited (“the Firm”) and while appointed as the Firm’s Compliance Officer for Legal Practice (“COLP”), Compliance Officer for Finance and Administration (“COFA”) and/or Money Laundering Reporting Officer (“MLRO”) between approximately May 2012 and October 2013 ("the Relevant Period") he:

1.1. Failed to take any, or adequate steps to prevent or stop another Partner in the Firm ("Partner A") use of the Firm’s Client Account to an offshore client entity ("Client C") and to third parties in circumstances where there was no underlying legal transaction and where payments were not payments in respect of a service forming part of the Firm's normal regulated activities.

1.2. Failed to cause adequate checks and/or due diligence to be conducted in relation to the transaction mentioned above at 1.1 and in respect of Client C.

1.3. Failed to prevent or stop Partner A's misconduct in circumstances where Partner A involved himself in an overseas investment scheme which was out of his area of expertise and experience, where there was no legitimate need for the involvement of solicitors in the transactions and where Partner A did not take adequate steps to satisfy himself as to the legitimacy of the dubious investment scheme in which he was involving the Firm.

1.4. Failed to report to the SRA the facts and matters alleged at 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 above.

In doing so, breached all or any of Rule 14.5 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2011, Rule 8.5 (c) and 8.5 (e) of the SRA Authorisation Rules 2011, Principles 2, 6 and 8 of the SRA Principles 2011 and Outcomes 7.2, 7.3 and 7.4 of the SRA Code of Conduct 2011.

The allegations are subject to a Hearing before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and are as yet unproven.

Help and more information