Bank: fraudster ‘confirmed’ account was with Barclays

A law firm which was duped into paying away the £333,532 proceeds of a property sale after failing to confirm a client’s email changing their bank details – which turned out to be faked – has been rebuked by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

Surrey firm Perry Hay & Co was able to recover all but £48,503 of it afterwards, with the balance made up by its professional indemnity insurer.

A regulatory settlement agreement published yesterday by the SRA recorded that the firm acted for a married couple, Mr and Mrs L, on the sale of a property.

Two days before completion, it emailed Mr L, asking him to provide his bank account details, which he did by return.

Later that day, Perry Hay received a further email purportedly from Mr L. This asked the firm to ignore the previous bank details. The following day another email provided new details. The firm replied asking the sender to confirm the name of the bank and the account holder; they replied that the account was in the name of Mr L and was held with Barclays Bank.

The firm transferred the proceeds the following day, having not contacted Mr L by any alternative means of communication to check the instructions.

It emerged soon after that Mr L’s email account had been compromised and the money had been paid into a third party’s bank account.

The firm reported it to the police, the bank and its insurers, but not the SRA, although it recorded the incident in its register of breaches.

Perry Hay was able to recover two tranches of money – £271,201 two weeks after completion, and a further £13,827 two months later. Its insurer replaced the outstanding money nine months after the loss.

As part of the agreement, the firm admitted breaches of the SRA principles and the accounts rules, including the failure to report the matter to the SRA.

In mitigation, Perry Hay said it has since taken steps designed to reduce the risk of repetition. “This included a review of its procedures and the engagement of third parties to provide training to its staff and assess the security of its IT systems.”

The agreement said: “The SRA considers this outcome to be proportionate and in the public interest. The outcome recognises the loss and inconvenience to Mr and Mrs L caused by the conduct of the firm.”

Perry Hay also agreed to pay the SRA costs of £1,350.


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

No larger firm can ignore the demands of innovation – that was the clear message from our most recent roundtable: “The law firm of the future”, sponsored by LexisNexis Enterprise Solutions. It comes in many forms, predominantly but not just technology, and is not simply a case of automating process. Expertise and process are not mutually exclusive.

Blog

18 July 2018

What do the whiplash reforms mean for children?

An element of the reforms contained in the Civil Liability Bill which seems to be flying mostly under the radar is the effect this will have on children.

Read More