Skip to main content

Jack Straw agrees meeting to discuss justice for Wolstenholmes victims

By
In the House of Commons today Cheadle MP Mark Hunter challenged the Secretary of State Jack Straw to reassure all those affected by the abrupt closure of Manchester Conveyancing Solicitors Wolstenholmes that their money and documents were safe.

Jack Straw shared the concerns and agreed to meet Mark to discuss the issue.

Mr Hunter told the House that he had been contacted by a number of distressed local residents and people from all over the country that currently have documents or money held by the firm.

In Justice Questions in the House of Commons, Mark asked Jack Straw to ensure that the concerned residents were fully compensated where appropriate. Jack Straw replied and agreed to meet with Mark to discuss the issue further.

Commenting, Mark Hunter MP said: "I'm very concerned about the sudden closure of such a long-established business. I've already heard from a number of constituents who have money and/or documents lodged with Wolstenholmes and who are worried about the consequences.”

"I'm advised by the SRA that for those who fear they have lost money, it will be dealt with by the solicitors indemnity insurance or the SRA Compensation Fund. People affected should contact DWF on 0161 603 5044.”

"My message is clear: I am determined to help solve this problem. I will be meeting with Jack Straw as soon as possible, I have already been in touch with the regulatory authority, and I will fight to ensure justice for all those affected by this unexpected closure."

On 30th December the news broke that Wolstenholmes, established in 1818, had been closed down by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and that five solicitors had their licences suspended amid claims of dishonesty and account irregularities.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FCA AML Audit: The SRA Is Out, the FCA Is In

By
For years, law firms prepared for AML scrutiny with one regulator in mind: the SRA. That era is over. The UK Government has confirmed a fundamental shift in supervision. AML and counter-terrorist financing oversight is moving from the SRA to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). This is not a cosmetic change. It is a full regulatory reset. If your firm is still thinking in terms of an internal review, an FCA AML audit will feel very different, financially, operationally, and reputationally. What Makes an FCA AML Audit Different The SRA regulates professional standards. The FCA enforces financial crime controls. That distinction matters. An FCA AML audit is not designed to guide or educate. It is designed to assess risk to the financial system and determine whether enforcement action is required. This is precisely why firms can no longer rely on internal reviews alone. An FCA AML audit will expect to see independent challenge, most ...
Post a Comment
Read more

How Often Should Your Firm Conduct an Independent AML Audit?

By
In the world of AML compliance, there is a significant difference between doing your work and proving that your work is effective. Anti-Money Laundering (AML) compliance is no longer a "set it and forget it" task. For firms regulated under the Money Laundering Regulations (MLR 2017), the requirement for an independent AML audit is a critical hurdle. But a common question persists among MLROs and Compliance Officers: How often do we actually need to do this? 1. The Regulatory Starting Point: "When Appropriate" The law (specifically Regulation 21 of the MLR 2017) states that a relevant person must establish an independent audit function "where appropriate, with regard to the size and nature of its business." While the legislation doesn’t give a hard calendar date, the consensus among regulators—including the SRA and the Legal Sector Affinity Group (LSAG)—is that for most firms, an audit should be conducted at least every 2 yea...
Post a Comment
Read more

Argie Bargie over Home Information Packs

By
In response to a question from Conservative MP David Amess on what methodology would be used to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the Home Information Pack programme, Communities and Local Government Minister Ian Austin was involved in heated argument. The wording of the debate ( reported in Hansard ) makes interesting reading, so I thought I would share it with you : Mr. David Amess (Southend, West) (Con): What methodology his Department plans to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the home information pack programme; and if he will make a statement. Mr. Andrew Mackay (Bracknell) (Con): What methodology his Department plans to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the home information pack programme; and if he will make a statement. Mr. David Jones (Clwyd, West) (Con): What methodology his Department plans to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the home information pack programme; and if he will make a statement. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local...
Post a Comment
Read more