Non-solicitor fee-earners sanctioned for creating false letters


Correspondence: Solicitor backdated letter

Non-solicitor fee-earners at two law firms who created fake letters – one for his own direct benefit – have been sanctioned by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

According to an SRA notice published this week, Caroline Haydock was employed as an associate at BLM’s Southampton office in 2014, when she created a letter to a claimant’s medical expert and backdated it.

She then attempted to mislead the claimant’s solicitors about the date on which she had prepared the letter.

She further signed a misleading witness statement that gave the impression that the letter was sent by first class post on the day she said it had been created, when it was not.

The SRA said that this conduct was dishonest and breached various of its principles. It issued her with a rebuke.

Ms Haydock ceased to work for the firm in June 2017 and is not currently working at or for an SRA-regulated practice.

In addition, she was made subject to a section 43 order – which means she cannot work for an SRA-regulated business without the regulator’s consent – and ordered to pay the SRA’s costs of £1,350.

Meanwhile, Colin Duck, who had been an equity release trainee and then an equity release assistant at Exeter firm Ashfords, was rebuked, fined £2,000 and also made the subject of a section 43 order.

The SRA said Mr Duck created and sent two letters to the tenant of his property which falsely claimed that Ashfords was acting for him in connection with the rental management of the property. The person named as signing the letters did not do so and Mr Duck gave him a false title.

Mr Duck also misled Ashfords during its internal investigation into his conduct, the SRA said. He resigned from the firm in June 2017 with immediate effect.

The SRA said this conduct was dishonest. It also ordered to him to pay costs of £600.




Blog


A new era of legal operations

What we are seeing in the UK legal market is extraordinary change that will greatly influence how firms operate and compete for years to come.


Strong AML controls are meaningless with incomplete data

One expectation as the FCA takes control of anti-money laundering oversight is a move towards more supervision rather than simply writing new rules.


Navigating the legal AI productivity-profitability paradox

Firms are achieving efficiencies through AI, especially in the practice of law. Yet many are struggling to see that reflected in their financial outcomes


Loading animation