Rebuke for solicitor who didn’t realise his client was dead


SRA: Solicitor’s conduct was reckless

A solicitor who did not realise that his client had died seven years previously when he purported to act for her has been rebuked by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

Ian Johnson, a partner at Knipe Woodhouse-Smith in Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire, took instructions from the dead client’s son without trying to contact her.

According to a regulatory settlement agreement published by the SRA yesterday, in July 2016 Mr Johnson was instructed to represent ‘Mrs B’ over a lease extension on a property she owned.

Mr Johnson took instructions from Mrs B’s son, Mr B, who was a long-standing client of the firm.

“Mr Johnson did not contact Mrs B to identify or verify her identity. Nor did he ensure that Mr B was authorised to give instruction on her behalf,” the agreement said.

The solicitor “undertook significant work on the matter” for the next 16 months, during which he referred to Mrs B as his client in correspondence.

In November 2017, after the documents for the lease extension had been agreed and were ready to be signed by the parties, Mr Johnson wrote to Mrs B, enclosing a copy of the documents for the lease extension, as well as his firm’s terms of engagement for Mrs B to sign. He also asked for documents verifying Mrs B’s identity and address.

This was the first time Mr Johnson had tried to contact Mrs B directly.

The following month, Mr B informed Mr Johnson that his mother had passed away in 2009. Mrs B’s estate had not yet been finalised.

“When Mr Johnson learned that Mrs B has died, he informed the other side and stopped acting in the matter,” the SRA recorded.

The solicitor admitted failing to achieve outcome 7.5 of the SRA Code of Conduct because he did not verify and identify his client at the start of the transaction, as required by Regulation 5(a) of the Money Laundering Regulations 2007.

Further, he breached principle 6 of the SRA Principles – “You must behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in you and in the provision of legal services”.

The SRA said the rebuke was an appropriate sanction for Mr Johnson’s “reckless” conduct, marking its “moderate seriousness” and the impact it had on the clients on the other side, but also recognising that there was no dishonesty or lack of integrity.




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

Our latest special report, produced in association with Temple Legal Protection, looks at the role of after-the-event (ATE) insurance in commercial litigation post-LASPO. We are at a time when insurers, solicitors, clients and litigation funders work ever more closely to create funding packages that work for all of them, with conditional fee and even damages-based agreements now part of many law firms’ armoury.

Blog

31 March 2020

How two firms use technology to minimise human error

Human error is a leading cause of reported data breaches in the legal industry, and mistakes like sending an email to the wrong person can have serious consequences under data privacy laws.

Read More

Loading animation