Partner used client money to pay his tax bill


HMRC: Solicitor misled tax authority

A partner at a London law firm responsible for dozens of unauthorised transfers from client account worth nearly £1.2m – in part to pay his tax bill – has been struck off.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) heard that when Andrew Brian Alexander Cooper was confronted by his partners at Streathers about what he had done, he stood up and stated: “I am absolutely fucked.” He then left the building.

Streathers reported him to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), which found that over nearly three years to June 2022 he made more than 80 unauthorised payments that led to a shortage of almost £1.2m on client account.

Most of the money was directed to other clients and third parties, and some went to the firm’s business account. Nearly £77,000 from six client matters was used to pay off his personal tax bill.

There was no evidence that any of the clients consented to the transfers.

Mr Cooper, who qualified in 2007, was a probate partner at Streathers before he was dismissed in November 2022. He did not engage with either the SRA or the SDT, which proceeded in his absence.

As well as the transfers, the SDT found that when acting for the executor of an estate, ‘Person A’, he wrote to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) to change their address for correspondence to his own personal address. He signed it with an electronic signature in the name of Person A

When Person A discovered that the address had been changed – because she failed HMRC’s security checks – Mr Cooper deleted the letter, and told both the client and HMRC that he did not send it. Streathers later recovered the letter from its system.

He admitted what he had done to the firm, saying that Person A was getting upset at the lack of progress on the matter and he felt that he could manage it more effectively if he received the letters from HMRC directly to his home address.

The SDT found that Mr Cooper had been dishonest and lacked integrity. His motivation was “financial gain” and he had caused “great harm” to Streathers. He was struck off and ordered to pay costs of nearly £30,000.

James Danaher, senior partner of Streathers, told Legal Futures: “The protection of client money is fundamental to the profession, and we take matters of professional conduct extremely seriously.

“As soon as concerns came to light, we acted promptly and decisively to safeguard clients’ interests. The firm cooperated fully with the SRA throughout its investigation, and we welcome the clarity brought by the SDT’s decision.”




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.

Blog


It’s time for law firms to ask tougher questions

For years, many law firms have treated ID verification as a box-ticking exercise. Run a liveness check, match a face to a document and move on. But that is no longer good enough.


Business fatigue to AI will risk job security

Whilst we know professional learning has always been part of career paths, to hire, retain and keep talent, AI needs to be embedded as a core part of this training.


On good authority? GenAI and the reputational risks to law firms

As GenAI’s influence grows, so do the risks which are already playing out in courtrooms across England and Wales, where some early adopters are setting precedents they would rather not.


Loading animation