A firm manager whose client was the son of Azerbaijan’s former national security minister has been fined £32,500 and restrictions imposed on his employment after he was found to have breached anti-money laundering rules.
Rory Peter Heddle Fordyce, admitted in 1979, was manager and director of Hampshire firm Taylor Fordyce Limited. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found he had failed to take adequate measures to establish the source of wealth and funds of Anar Mahmudov, the son of Eldar Mahmudov, Azerbaijan’s former national security minister, in relation to two transactions of £1.1 million and £1,946,603.
Two further allegations - that he had used the firm’s client account as a banking facility in relation to the £1.1m between January and April 2014, and that between May 2014 and January 2022 used the firm’s client account as a banking facility for his own personal payments – were found proved with Fordyce admitting the latter allegation in full.
Allegations that Fordyce had borrowed money from Mahmudov for his and/or the firm’s benefit and that Fordyce had provided a £138,200 loan to a client of the firm were found not proved.
Fordyce admitted he ‘failed to take adequate steps to establish the source of wealth and source of funds of Mr Mahmudov’ and accepted ‘on reflection’ that the steps he took and the checks undertaken ‘were not sufficient to comply with the MLRs’.
The SDT judgment said: ‘Mr Fordyce emphasised that his failings were unintentional and that he had used this as a learning point by undertaking intensive anti-money laundering training.’
Read more
Fordyce ‘had undertaken some checks in order to assess any risk [but] those checks were (as had been admitted) inadequate’. The SDT said he ‘had prioritised the transaction over his regulatory obligations’ and the steps taken by Fordyce were ‘rudimentary, piecemeal and naïve’. It added: ‘His failures were, it was determined, sufficiently serious, culpable and reprehensible.’
In mitigation, Michael Uberoi for Fordyce said no third party had been harmed by the matters found proved, no ‘actual harm’ was caused to any individual as a result of money laundering, and no client money had been misused. This was not a case in which any money laundering had taken place.
Considering sanction, the SDT acknowledged Fordyce had shown ‘a degree of insight into his misconduct’ It added: ‘Whilst Mr Fordyce was not motivated by direct personal gain to commit misconduct, his misconduct arose as a result of his prioritising expediency and convenience over compliance with his regulatory obligations. He subordinated those duties to his desire not to jeopardise the transaction for an important client.
The SDT fined Fordyce £32,500 and imposed restrictions on his practice for five years. Under those restrictions he may not practise as a sole practitioner, manager or owner of an authorised or recognised body, take on various roles includes compliance officer for legal practice or a money laundering compliance officer, or be a signatory on any client account. Fordyce was also ordered to pay £50,000 costs.
