• Application 11798-2018
  • Admitted 2002
  • Hearing 30 May 2018
  • Reasons 13 June 2018

The SDT ordered that the respondent should be struck off the roll. 

By making client to office transfers totalling £12,590 in relation to costs which were not properly due, the respondent had breached principles 2, 6 and 10 of the SRA Principles 2011 and rules 7, 14.3 and 20.1 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2011. He had acted dishonestly.

By authorising improper transfers of client monies totalling £248,698 for his own benefit and for that of unconnected clients, and by causing a minimum cash shortage on client account, he had breached principles 2, 6 and 10 and rules 20.1 and 7 of the rules. He had acted dishonestly.

He had obtained a personal loan from his client, without informing him that he should take independent legal advice, thereby breaching principles 3, 4 and 6 and failing to achieve outcome 3.4 of the SRA Code of Conduct 2011. 

When acting for Mr & Mrs B in relation to their purchase of a property, he had breached principles 2, 4, 5, 6 and 10 and rule 20.1 of the rules. He had acted dishonestly. 

He had failed to comply promptly with an undertaking, thereby breaching principles 4, 5 and 6 and failing to achieve outcome 11.2 of the code. 

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

The respondent had admitted all of the allegations against him. Those admissions had been properly made.

The respondent had faced and admitted allegations of dishonesty. While he had advanced health issues by way of mitigation, he had not sought to establish that there were exceptional circumstances. 

The proposed sanction that the respondent be struck off the roll was the appropriate sanction.

The respondent was ordered to pay costs of £2,904.