A struck-off solicitor sent a series of legal threats to opposing parties after being instructed to advise in a bitter business dispute, a court has heard. Upper Tribunal Judge Andrew Scott, sitting as a deputy High Court judge in Chave v Farnworth & Ors, said the letters sent to four individuals were ‘incendiary’ and made allegations where the factual basis was ‘non-existent’.
In a dispute between directors of Essex and East London Van Services Limited, cross-petitioner Adam Farnsworth had instructed Hylton-Potts Legal Consultants LLP, a firm owned and managed by struck-off solicitor Rodney Hylton-Potts, to write what the client described as ‘strongly worded’ letters to his business partner. That description of the letters was a ‘considerable understatement’, the judge said.
According to the judgment, the correspondence stated that the partner Kevin Chave had conspired to steal intellectual property and confidential information, breached the terms of the Computer Misuse Act and committed theft and fraud. HPLC gave Chave two working days to email a response and warned that if he refused to resign his directorship and relinquish his shares then High Court litigation would follow. It added the warning that ‘you will make things worse for yourselves by resisting the inevitable’.
The letter concluded: ‘Put bluntly, you have picked the wrong claimants and the wrong lawyer to try your scam,’ then added: ‘There is no question of any further notice, extension or negotiations. Either you respond, positively, or the consequences will not be to your liking.’
The judge noted that the letter had claimed that a ‘substantial dossier’ was being prepared to be handed to the police. At the time, there was no dossier and no evidence of a criminal conspiracy.
‘To have sent such a letter without intimating, or even hinting at, these concerns beforehand to his business partner struck a decisive and terminal blow to Kevin and Adam’s business relationship,’ said the judge.
Further accusations of a criminal conspiracy were repeatedly made in a subsequent email and letters from HPLC. The court heard that Chave discovered a payment of £20,000 was made to HPLC from the company accounts a few weeks after these emails and letter were sent.
The judge found that this correspondence formed part of Farnsworth’s ‘unreasonable response’ that unfairly prejudiced Chave’s interests as a shareholder. The appropriate relief was for Farnsworth to purchase Chave’s shares in the company for almost £295,000.
Rodney Hylton-Potts was struck off in 1997, according to the SRA website. He describes himself on his company website as a ‘progressive and “maverick” lawyer who has championed “the little man and woman”, and the abused and unpopular since the 1970s’.
Based in London, his firm’s banner is ‘Providing a better and cheaper legal service than solicitors since 1999’.
An individual who has been struck off the roll can continue to do certain unreserved legal work provided they do not hold themselves out as a solicitor.
