"You are so busy doing billable work and wearing multiple hats that you cannot find the unbillable time to address the non-billable, high-stakes compliance work."

We know you are busy. That is not a criticism it is the structural reality of a small firm. We are here to provide the independent examination that frees you from the uncertainty of not knowing where your framework stands.

The MLRO

You are doing the compliance work and the fee-earning work simultaneously. Responsible for the AML framework, for training, for supervising SARs, for keeping the FWRA current whilst also carrying a caseload and serving clients.

The compliance work does not stop because the billable work is busy. And the anxiety of not knowing whether the framework is adequate does not stop either.

The sole principal or senior partner

You are ultimately responsible and you know it but the day-to-day falls elsewhere. Your oversight may be lighter than it should be, and you carry the personal regulatory exposure that comes with that.

Commissioning an audit feels like opening a door you are not sure you want to open. But the risk of not opening it is greater than the risk of what is behind it.

The compliance officer

You know the framework and you know where it is weakest. The areas where practice does not match policy. Where fee earners take shortcuts under time pressure. Where the FWRA has not been updated to reflect changes in the firm's work.

You want an independent view that validates what you already suspect and gives you the documented basis to act on it.

Document and file review

The file review serves three distinct purposes depending on where the firm is. Understanding which applies is part of the initial consultation.

As a first step for the firm considering an audit. Before committing to the fuller Regulation 21 process, a file review gives an early indicator of whether the framework is working in practice. Whether CDD is being completed. Whether risk assessments are proportionate. Whether the files reflect the policies. It is scoped and limited it cannot substitute for the full audit but it tells the firm enough to make a more informed decision about the right next step.

As an ongoing monitoring process. For the firm that has completed an audit and wants to maintain its position between formal audit cycles. Periodic file reviews evidence that the framework is not just documented but embedded and working on live files. This is the continuous assurance obligation that sits alongside the formal audit not a one-time event but a regular part of how the firm manages its compliance position.

As a standalone engagement. For the firm that wants an objective external view of whether its current files meet its own CDD policies without the full audit process and at a proportionate cost.

All file reviews produce a written note of findings and practical recommendations. Scope is agreed before the engagement begins.

We help you know.

Not what you want to hear. What you need to know. The firms that commission an independent examination of their AML position before it becomes urgent are the firms that are in control of their regulatory story rather than responding to someone else's version of it.

Acting on the quiet question before it becomes a loud one is the right instinct. 

The initial consultation is where that process begins.

All AML fees are bespoke fixed fees agreed before any engagement begins. See our fees page for details.