A veteran solicitor who was embroiled in a Ponzi-style investment scheme has been struck off the roll. Robert Sedgwick, admitted in 1973, was found by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal to have repeatedly backdated documents relevant to London Capital and Finance which collapsed in 2019 owing more than £379m.
Sedgwick was one of several individuals subject to legal proceedings from the LCF adminstrators in which Mr Justice Miles described how the solicitor received more than £500,000 from his involvement in the scheme. The judge said Sedgwick and others knowingly took part in fraudulent conduct and dishonestly assisted breaches of duty by company owners.
Sedgwick had spent his entire legal career with Kent firm Buss Murton Law and was a consultant until 2017, since when he has not held a practising certificate.
Between 2013 and 2018, LCF raised more than £237m from retail investors by selling ‘mini bonds’ to about 11,600 bondholders. LCF presented itself to investors as a commercial lender to the small and medium-sized sector in the UK, but in fact advanced the money it raised to a small number of connected companies associated with four individuals. Much of the monies lent proved irrecoverable.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority, prosecuting, said Sedgwick changed dates on loan agreements to give a misleading impression to auditors and regulators about when they were executed.
Sedgwick, who was not present at his tribunal hearing last month, had denied one allegation, saying he had little involvement with the preparation of certain documents and had no idea they would be backdated.
The tribunal did not accept his explanation and found that he knew documents were backdated. Sedgwick admitted to the tribunal that he backdated certain agreements between parties. Mr Justice Miles had said in his ruling that the solicitor’s backdating of documents was ‘endemic’.
The tribunal also heard that for more than two years, Sedgwick owned and controlled a company called GST, whose role was to act as security trustee protecting the interests of bondholders.
Sedgwick acted for many companies which borrowed money from LCF and indeed was company secretary for some of them.
Mr Justice Miles had said a key function of any security trustee would be to enforce security against the borrowers, noting there was an obvious conflict and that GST could not independently represent the investors against the borrowers.
The SDT found that the risk of a conflict was ‘so obvious that it was staggering that Mr Sedgwick (who was an extremely experienced solicitor) did not see the significant risk of an own interest conflict from the outset’.
It added: ‘Mr Sedgwick’s actions resulted from his complete failure to have regard to his regulatory obligations and his obligations as the security trustee. He had acted in breach of the trust placed in him by the bondholders whom he had a fiduciary duty to protect. He was wholly and solely culpable for his conduct.’
The SRA applied for £68,500 costs but the tribunal made no order for costs as Sedgwick was already bankrupt.
Please note: Anonymous comments will no longer be permitted on this site from 1 June. Please see our revised site terms here
