A retired City partner has been fined £24,862 after allowing a law firm’s client account to be used for a series of non-legal payments linked to a yacht matter, according to a decision notice from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).
Regulator finds misuse of client account over 10 months
The SRA decision concerns Jay Allan Tooker, formerly a partner at Holman Fenwick Willan and co-head of the firm’s yacht department. In 2021, while acting in relation to the seizure of a vessel, he advised a client on options to retrieve the yacht and on monies owed to a port authority and other creditors. Over a period of 10 months, he authorised 22 payments via the firm’s client account, amounting to hundreds of thousands of pounds, to cover crew salaries, hardstanding, management and storage fees, and insurance. None of those payments formed part of regulated legal services provided by the firm, the regulator said.
The activity came to light during an internal review of ‘know your client’ checks, when the firm scrutinised transfers made from funds held in the client account for the matter. Tooker accepted that he had permitted the client account to be used in a way that provided banking facilities and that he had approved the payments.
Breach of accounts rules and public trust principle
The SRA found the conduct breached its accounts rules and the overarching principle requiring solicitors to act in a manner that maintains public trust in the profession. In setting out its reasoning, the regulator stated:
“Mr Tooker’s conduct showed a disregard for his regulatory obligations to exercise proper management over client account money. The lack of control and proper oversight of the client account led to the account being repeatedly used to provide banking facilities.”
Tooker, who retired in March this year, has been admitted to the roll since 1989 and has no prior regulatory history. The SRA recorded that he co‑operated fully, demonstrated genuine insight into the failings and that, in practice, there was no actual harm or loss to the client or any third party. On that basis, the regulator assessed the risk of repetition as low.
Penalty calculation and costs
The financial penalty was set at 5% of Tooker’s gross annual income and reduced by 25% to reflect early admissions and co‑operation. In addition to the fine, he agreed to pay £1,350 towards the SRA’s costs.
| Outcome | Amount |
|---|---|
| Fine (after reduction) | £24,862 |
| Costs | £1,350 |
Why it matters in the Square Mile
Client accounts are tightly regulated to protect client funds and preserve public confidence in legal services. Using them as a conduit for general payments, even when connected to a client’s broader commercial arrangements, risks blurring the line between legal work and banking. The SRA’s findings underline that partners and senior fee‑earners in City firms remain accountable for ensuring rigorous controls around client money, regardless of the commercial pressures of complex, cross‑border matters such as those involving high‑value vessels.
- Authorising payments from client accounts must be directly linked to the delivery of regulated legal services.
- Internal audits and robust KYC reviews are essential safeguards to detect and prevent misuse.
- Co‑operation, early admissions and a clean record can influence sanction levels, but breaches still attract significant penalties.
Context for practitioners and clients
For legal practices operating in the City of London’s specialist markets, including shipping and yachting, the decision serves as a reminder that administrative convenience cannot override the SRA’s accounts regime. Firms are expected to maintain clear oversight of client funds, document decision‑making and ensure that any disbursements are squarely within the scope of regulated services on the matter in question. Clients, in turn, can expect law firms to ring‑fence client monies and avoid acting as de facto bankers.
The SRA’s notice concludes that, while the individual circumstances did not result in loss, the repeated use of the client account for non‑legal outgoings represented a serious compliance lapse. The case reinforces the regulator’s continuing focus on client account governance across the Square Mile’s legal sector.
