Rush to meet end of SDLT holiday caused solicitor to let down client


Deadline: Solicitor’s work was highly pressurised at the time

A conveyancer who forgot to put in place a declaration of trust on the ownership of a property in the rush to beat the stamp duty holiday deadline in 2021 has been rebuked.

Parveen Sidhu told the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) that her work was “highly pressurised” at the time of completion due to “a significantly increased workload” caused by the end of the stamp duty land tax reduction on 30 June 2021.

According to a notice published by the SRA yesterday, she worked at Axiom Ince at the time and is now at Taylor Rose MW.

In May 2021, she was instructed to sell two properties – one was owned jointly by mother and daughter, and the other by the daughter and her husband – and use the funds from both to purchase another property.

The purchase was to be registered in the joint names of the daughter and her husband alone and Ms Sidhu advised that a declaration of trust be prepared to reflect the agreement between the parties.

She referred them to a colleague for this and advised that the declaration would need to be in place on completion, which the parties had instructed her to achieve by 30 June.

On 29 June, Ms Sidhu completed the sales and purchase without the declaration being executed, having not taken instructions on doing so. “This meant the mother’s contribution was not protected,” the SRA said. Her son subsequently complained to the firm and to the SRA.

Ms Sidhu admitted breaching paragraph 3.4 of the SRA code of conduct – by failing to consider and take account of one of her client’s attributes, needs and circumstances – and that she failed to act in the best interests of her client.

In mitigation, she said that, because of the work pressures, she overlooked taking instructions on completing without the declaration in place, but that it was an isolated incident and she has shown “insight and remorse”.

The SRA said a written rebuke was the appropriate sanction, recognising that her conduct was “reckless as to risk of harm” to the mother.

Ms Sidhu is also to pay the SRA costs of £300.




    Readers Comments

  • Mark Kiteley says:

    What am I missing here? Busy solicitor makes mistake for which the firm will have insurance. If the mistake is innocent, why is it a disciplinary matter?


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


A two-point plan to halve the size of the SRA

I have joked for many years that you could halve the size (and therefore cost) of the Solicitors Regulation Authority overnight by banning both client account and sole practitioners.


Key cyber and data security questions to ask a legal IT provider

One of the growing priorities that law firms face when considering a legal technology provider is cyber and data security, such as their responsibilities and cyber incident management.


Navigating carer’s leave: A personal journey and call for change

The Carer’s Leave Act 2023, which came into force on 6 April 2024, was a pivotal moment for the UK. It allows workers to take up to five unpaid days off a year to carry out caring responsibilities.


Loading animation