• Application 11749-2017
  • Admitted 2012
  • Hearing 31 May 2018
  • Reasons 13 June 2018

The SDT ordered that the respondent should be struck off.

The respondent had made statements to the mother of her client, C, concerning the progress of a claim for damages under the Fatal Accident Act 1976 which were untrue and which she knew, or should have known, to be untrue at the time that they were made, in breach of principles 2 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011. She had acted dishonestly.

She had created 23 letters which, to her knowledge, were each dated earlier than the actual date of their creation, and had placed them on the relevant client matter files so as to make it appear that she had progressed those matters when she had not, in breach of principles 2 and 6. She had acted dishonestly.

The matter was dealt with by way of the agreed outcome procedure.

The respondent’s admissions had been properly made. She had faced allegations of dishonesty and had admitted dishonesty. While she had advanced a number of factors by way of mitigation she did not seek to establish that there were exceptional circumstances. The proposed sanction was that she be struck off the roll. That was the appropriate sanction and the SDT made the order sought.

The respondent was ordered to pay costs of £2,500.