Rizwan Ahmad

• Application 10364-2009
• Admitted 1997
• Hearing 20 April 2010
• Reasons 2 June 2010

The SDT ordered that the respondent, of High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire HP13, should pay a fine of £4,000.

The SDT further ordered that unless the respondent delivered to the Solicitors Regulation Authority by 30 June 2010 the outstanding accountant’s reports in respect of Herald Solicitors for the periods ending 31 March 2008, 31 March 2009 and 30 September 2009, he should be suspended from practice as a solicitor for an indefinite period commencing on 1 July 2010. The respondent had failed and/or delayed in delivery of an accountant’s report for the period ending 31March 2008, due to be delivered to the Solicitors Regulation Authority on or before an extended date of 28 October 2008, contrary to section 34 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (as amended) and the rules made thereunder; he had failed and/or delayed in delivery of accountant’s reports for the period ending 31 March 2009, due to be delivered on or before 30 September 2009, and for the six-month period ending 30 September 2009, due to be delivered on 30 November 2009, contrary to section 34 of the 1974 Act and the rules made thereunder; he had failed to comply with a condition attached to his 2008/2009 practising certificate as regards the filing of half-yearly accountant’s reports, contrary to rule 20.10 of the Solicitors Code of conduct 2007; and he had failed to deal in an open, prompt and co-operative way with the SRA, contrary to rule 20.05 of the code.

The SDT found that it was a serious case. The respondent had started practising nearly four years previously and had failed to produce any accountant’s reports for any period to the SRA. Further, he had failed to co-operate with the SRA and had ignored correspondence. The respondent had told the SDT that he had changed and was horrified to look back at his old self. The SDT hoped that the respondent had learnt his lesson and that in future he would be more open and co-operative, and would comply with the regulations which applied to all solicitors. The filing of accountant’s reports was essential to protect the public, and the SDT’s order was intended to ensure that the outstanding reports would be filed.

The SDT also imposed a financial penalty on the respondent and ordered him to pay costs of £1,366.