Tag Results

Solicitor who tried to avoid paying stamp duty on firm office purchase struck off

A solicitor has been struck off after he bought his home and his firm’s office for £1.3m but dishonestly declared he had paid only £265,000 altogether, in order to avoid paying over £50,000 in stamp duty land tax. He also attempted to dissuade the HMRC from making fines it issued to him public so as not to alert the SRA.

August 14th, 2017 | No Comments »

Immigration lawyer who misled court suspended indefinitely

A solicitor who misled the court over the ‘student’ status of a client has been suspended indefinitely by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. The tribunal heard that the client told Mansoor Ali that he had been “paying money to agents” to get certificates from universities, with the aim of getting indefinite leave to remain in the UK.

August 1st, 2017 | No Comments »

“No reason” for sharp rise in interventions, SRA says

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has said it cannot explain why the number of interventions into law firms in the first five months of 2017 was twice the figure for the same period last year. The regulator said there was also a “noticeable increase” in the size of firm.

July 28th, 2017 | No Comments »

SDT strikes off solicitor for falsely claiming to work at former firm

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal has struck off a senior solicitor for dishonestly holding himself out as working for his former firm and falsely stating that he had sent out fewer letters on the firm’s notepaper than he knew to be the case.

July 27th, 2017 | No Comments »

Family lawyer who confessed “within hours” to faking letter is fined £2,000

A solicitor who confessed to his law firm that he had faked a letter “within hours” of sending it to a client, has been fined £2,000 by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Ian Giddings, based at the Warwick office of national family firm Woolley & Co, admitted creating and backdating the letter.

July 27th, 2017 | No Comments »

Solicitor who used office account “as personal account” is struck off

A sole practitioner who did not have a client account and admitted using his office account “at times as a personal account” has been struck off by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. The tribunal heard that Michael Healey, based in Liverpool, misappropriated over £31,000 of client money before going bankrupt.

July 21st, 2017 | No Comments »

SDT strikes off solicitor for dishonesty after 45 years of practice

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal has struck off a solicitor for dishonestly backdating enduring powers of attorney and claiming to have witnessed signatures “to save clients money” after an unblemished career of more than 40 years. He also failed to return money to a client for at least six years and used some of it for the benefit of another client.

June 19th, 2017 | No Comments »

Clerk who pursued PI claims against wishes of clients banned by SDT

A clerk who pursued personal injury claims against the wishes of his clients has been banned from working for law firms by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. Michael Davis said he was acting “in accordance with office procedures” and was managing up to 400 live cases at any one time.

June 16th, 2017 | No Comments »

SDT strikes off dishonest solicitor for second time after deceiving lenders about who was doing their work

A solicitor has been struck off for the second time and ordered to pay costs of almost £66,000 after dishonestly misleading mortgage lenders in order to service clients of a firm which was excluded from lenders’ panels. He also allowed his client account to be used as an escrow banking facility to lend credibility to dubious transactions involving diamonds and fine art.

June 14th, 2017 | No Comments »

Partners at Yorkshire firm fined over conflicts of interest

Two partners who acted both for former clients of a law firm shut down by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and for one of that firm’s solicitors have been fined by a disciplinary tribunal. However, they had to accept higher fines than had been agreed with the regulator to satisfy the tribunal’s view of the seriousness of their misconduct.

June 9th, 2017 | No Comments »