A solicitor who allowed his firm to be used as a banking facility for over £30m has been suspended.
The SDT found there were no underlying legal transactions to justify all those payments and that Osmond caused or allowed those payments to be made.
Osmond admitted allowing ‘the firm’s client account to be used as a banking facility, for no other reason than the convenience of the client’, the SDT judgment shows.
‘There was no evidence discovered by the Forensic Investigating Officer to suggest the respondent ever questioned Person A to ask why he was being asked to receive/make payment of funds and for what purpose. This was despite the significant amount of payments made to third parties across all six matters.’
Osmond admitted continuing to authorise transactions over a thirty-nine month period and to creating a clear risk of the firm facilitating money laundering.
In mitigation, he pointed out that none of the transactions resulted in loss to any client or third party and he did not profit from them.
Although the tribunal felt the misconduct ‘fell within the range to merit striking off from the roll’, it agreed an indefinite restriction order in addition to a 12-month suspension.
The restrictions prevent Osmond from practising as a sole practitioner or sole manager or sole owner of an authorised or recognised body; or as a freelance solicitor; or as a solicitor in an unregulated organisation; being a head of legal practice/compliance officer for legal practice or a head of finance and administration/compliance officer for finance and administration; holding client money and being a signatory on any client account.
