Regulatory

George Lafferty 

In terms of Regulation 5.33 of the ICAS Insolvency Regulations, notice is hereby given that the ICAS Authorisation Committee has applied a regulatory penalty of £1,500 to the Insolvency Practitioner (IP) George Lafferty, in respect that Mr Lafferty made a payment after the commencement of a winding-up without seeking valid approval in accordance with Rule 4.7(5) of The Insolvency (Scotland) (Receivership and Winding up) Rules 2018. 

The Committee was satisfied that a regulatory penalty was appropriate in the circumstances. In reaching its decision on the amount of the penalty, the Committee had regard to the Common Sanctions Guidance for Insolvency Complaints (“the Guidance”), noting the indicative sanctions in Part 2 of the Guidance. The Committee assessed the level of seriousness of the conduct to be “less serious”, on the basis that (i) the IP intended to draw the fee before his appointment and had obtained approval from the directors pre-appointment but the invoice was raised and drawn post-appointment, (ii) the issue had only arisen on one of the IP’s cases, and (iii) changes in the firm's internal processes may have contributed to the error. The indicative sanction in the Guidance for drawing unauthorised remuneration where the conduct is categorised as “less serious” is £2,000. As a mitigating factor, the Committee noted that the IP had repaid the fee and sought approval from creditors once the issue had been highlighted to him. The Committee therefore concluded that a penalty of £1,500 was appropriate in the circumstances. 

Regulatory Penalties for AML breaches

In terms of Regulation 5.25 of the ICAS Anti-Money Laundering Regulations (the AML Regulations), notice is given that the Authorisation Committee (the Committee) has applied regulatory penalties to two firms for failing to comply with their statutory obligations under Anti-Money Laundering Legislation as required in terms of Regulation 4.16 of the AML Regulations. The penalties ranged from £300 to £700.  

The areas of non-compliance included:

• Failures to adequately document the firm’s AML policy.
• Failure to undertake a whole firm compliance review.
• Failures in connection with the firm’s customer due diligence (CDD) requirements. These included failures to (i) identify and verify all directors and BOOMs (beneficial owners, officers or managers), (ii) complete risk assessments for all clients, (iii) failure to record Know Your Client records on all files, (iv) failure to consider the potential requirement for Enhanced Due Diligence in respect of a non-face-to-face client, and (v) failure to document evidence of ongoing monitoring.   

In determining the amount of the penalties, the Committee had regard to the ICAS AML Regulatory Actions Guidance, which was revised in April 2025. As a temporary measure, during the transition to the revised Guidance, the Committee has decided that the firms should not be named when the penalties are publicised. 

JS Accountancy Services Limited

In terms of Regulation 5.25 of the ICAS Anti-Money Laundering Regulations (the AML Regulations), notice is given that the Authorisation Committee has applied a regulatory penalty of £3,000 to the firm of JS Accountancy Services Limited for failing to comply with its statutory obligations under Anti-Money Laundering Legislation as required in terms of Regulation 4.16 of the AML Regulations. The firm failed to apply appropriate Enhanced Due Diligence for a single client, even though the firm knew, or ought to have known, that the client was high risk. The firm had also failed to consider and document the ethical implications of engaging the client.  

The penalty was determined by the Committee in accordance with the ICAS AML Regulatory Actions Guidance which was in force between April 2022 and April 2025.