The First Respondent, a solicitor admitted in 2006, was at the material time the Compliance Officer for Legal Practice (COLP) and an owner of the Second Respondent, Archstone Solicitors Limited, a small firm based in Stratford. Following an Adjudicator’s Decision of 19 October 2022 which imposed a fine, costs and three conditions on the Firm’s authorisation in relation to non-compliance with the SRA Transparency Rules 2018, the Firm was required, within 30 days, to demonstrate compliance with the rules and to take down its former website at archstone.org.uk. Over a period of approximately two years thereafter the Firm failed to bring either of its two websites into compliance, notwithstanding repeated contact from the SRA and the First Respondent’s own assurances that compliance would be achieved regarding the second website though he had explained to the SRA that there was nothing he could do about the first website. The First Respondent’s engagement with the regulator was sporadic throughout the period, with extended intervals of complete non-response. The Respondents admitted the allegations brought by the SRA, and the Tribunal, having satisfied itself by reference to Dentons UK and Middle East LLP v SRA [2026] EWCA Civ 508 that the conduct met the threshold of seriousness required to constitute professional misconduct, found all of the allegations in the Rule 12 Statement proved in full.