Murat Cem Kinas
Solicitor
337580

Decision - Agreement

Outcome: Regulatory settlement agreement

Outcome date: 16 January 2026

Published date: 20 January 2026

Firm details

Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Kinas Solicitors Limited

Address(es): 393 Green Lanes, London, N4 1EU.

Firm ID: 557288

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by agreement.

Decision details

1. Agreed outcome

1.1 Murat Cem Kinas ('Mr Kinas'), a solicitor and sole director of Kinas Solicitors Ltd ('the Firm'), agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of his conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

1. he is fined £14,318
2. to the publication of this agreement
3. he will pay the costs of the investigation of £600.

2. Summary of Facts

2.1 The SRA received a qualified accountant's report for the year ending 31 December 2022 following accountants being instructed by the Firm to prepare a report in accordance with the SRA Accounts Rules 2019.

2.2 Following receipt of the qualified accountant's report we carried out a forensic inspection of the Firm's accounts. The inspection identified the following issues:

• After identifying in July 2022 a difference of £33,456.85 between the balance held on the Firm's client account and what the Firm's accounting records showed as being the total liabilities to its clients, it was not resolved until April 2024.
• For seven years between 2014 and 2021 the Firm was in receipt of qualified accountants reports but it did not deliver these to the SRA.

3. Admissions

3.1 Mr Kinas makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:

1. He identified in July 2022 that there was a difference of £33,456.85 between the balance held on the Firm's client account and the total liabilities owed to the Firms' clients. However, he did not resolve this until 23 April 2024 when he made a payment from the Firm's office account to its client account. His conduct breached rule 8.3 of the SRA Accounts Rules which says:
   • 'You complete at least every five weeks, for all client accounts held or operated by you, a reconciliation of the bank or building society statement balance with the cash book balance and the client ledger total, a record of which must be signed off by the COFA or a manager of the firm. You should promptly investigate and resolve any differences shown by the reconciliation.'
2. He failed to deliver to the SRA within six months of the end of the accounting period qualified accountants reports between the years 2014 and 2021. His conduct breached rule 32 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2011 and rule 12.1 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2019 which say:

Rule 32 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2011

Subject to rule 32A.1A, if you have, at any time during an accounting period, held or received client money, or operated a client's own account as signatory, you must:-

1. (a) obtain an accountant's report for that accounting period within six months of the end of the accounting period; and
2. if the report has been qualified, deliver it to the SRA within six months of the end of the accounting period.

Rule 12.1 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2019

If you have, at any time during an accounting period, held or received client money, or operated a joint account or a client's own account as signatory, you must:

1. obtain an accountant's report for that accounting period within six months of the end of the period; and
2. deliver it to the SRA within six months of the end of the accounting period if the accountant's report is qualified to show a failure to comply with these rules, such that money belonging to clients or third parties is, or has been, or is likely to be placed, at risk.

4. Why a fine is an appropriate outcome

4.1 The SRA's Enforcement Strategy sets out its approach to the use of its enforcement powers where there has been a failure to meet its standards or requirements.

4.2 When considering the appropriate sanctions and controls in this matter, the SRA has taken into account the admissions made by Mr Kinas and the following mitigation which he has put forward:

1. Mr Kinas made early and voluntary admissions to the breaches.
2. Mr Kinas' failure to deliver accounts' reports was on account of his misunderstanding of his obligations and not intentional.

He has since taken action to resolve this and update his knowledge.

3. No client has suffered any harm or loss as a result of the breaches which occurred.
4. Mr Kinas has shown genuine insight into the failings which occurred and has expressed regret that the breaches occurred.
5. Mr Kinas has attended SRA Account Rules and Compliance Officer for Administration training to improve his knowledge and understanding of the relevant rules.
6. Mr Kinas has appointed a new bookkeeper to assist with the Firm's accounts and has put in place additional resource to ensure the firm's meets its obligations.
7. Mr Kinas has no previous regulatory history and there are no other current outstanding matters against him.

4.3 The SRA considers that a fine is the appropriate outcome because:

2. The conduct which resulted in a breach of regulatory obligations also had the potential to cause harm to clients.
3. Mr Kinas had responsibility within the firm to make sure it met the requirements of the SRA Accounts Rules and failed to do so.
4. The agreed outcome is a proportionate outcome in the public interest and is a credible deterrent to others.
5. The conduct persisted for a number of years before being remedied.

4.4 A fine is appropriate to maintain professional standards and uphold public confidence in the solicitors' profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons. A financial penalty therefore meets the requirements of rule 4.1 of the Regulatory and Disciplinary Procedure Rules.

5. Amount of the fine

5.1 The amount of the fine has been calculated in line with the SRA's published guidance on its approach to setting an appropriate financial penalty (the Guidance).

5.2 Having regard to the Guidance, the SRA and Mr Kinas agree that the nature of the misconduct was more serious because it continued for a number of years and could have impacted client monies. The Guidance gives this type of misconduct a score of three.

5.3 The SRA and Mr Kinas agree that the impact of the misconduct was medium. The conduct had the potential to cause moderate loss or have moderate impact as the difference as described above went unresolved for almost two years and the Firm failed to submit qualified accountants reports to the SRA for seven years. The Guidance gives this level of impact a score of four.

5.4 The nature and impact scores add up to seven. The Guidance indicates a broad penalty bracket of between 16% and 49% of Mr Kinas's gross annual income is appropriate.

5.5 In deciding the level of fine within this bracket, the SRA has considered the mitigation at paragraph 4.2 above which Mr Kinas has put forward. 5.6 On this basis, the SRA considers that a fine at the lower end of the bracket is appropriate. However, this must be balanced against the fact that Mr Kinas was directly responsible for compliance with the SRA Accounts Rules and the breaches continued for a number of years. The SRA considers a basic penalty towards the bottom of the bracket to be appropriate.

5.7 Based on the evidence Mr Kinas has provided of his gross annual income for the most recent tax year, this results in a basic penalty of £19,090.

5.8 The SRA considers that the basic penalty should be reduced to £14,318. This reduction reflects the fact that Mr Kinas made early admissions to the breaches which were identified and cooperated with the SRA investigation.

5.9 Mr Kinas does not appear to have made any financial gain or received any other benefit as a result of his conduct. Therefore, no adjustment is necessary to remove this, and the amount of the fine is £14,318.

6. Publication

6.1 The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process. Mr Kinas agrees to the publication of this agreement.

7. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement

7.1 Mr Kinas agrees that he will not deny the admissions made in this agreement or act in any way which is inconsistent with it.

7.2 If Mr Kinas denies the admissions or acts in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be considered further by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary outcome or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations

7.3 Denying the admissions made or acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of principles 2 and 5 of the Principles and paragraph 7.3 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs.

8. Costs

8.1 Mr Kinas agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of £600. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.