SDT: Professional objectivity diminished
A criminal law solicitor has been urged to use a six-month suspension to separate his legal work from the counselling support he provides to sex offender clients, after mixing them led to rule breaches.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) suspended Mark Ian Williams for practising without authorisation through his counselling company and paying fees for legal work into his personal bank account.
It described him as a “deeply caring individual” with a “very worthy vocation” but it had “blurred the boundaries” between solicitor and client.
Mr Williams, admitted in 1992, worked for Frame Smith & Co in Surrey under a consultancy agreement.
The SDT said he had “a keen interest in helping those accused of sexual offences to address their behaviour” and “devised and runs a course which aims to assist people to move away from the urges that lead to such offending”.
He charged a monthly retainer for his counselling work – which included 24-hour telephone support – paid to him personally.
Mr Williams admitted carrying out legal work for two sex offender clients through his counselling business, in breach of the authorisation rules, holding client money in his personal bank account, and not returning the balance promptly.
In one case, Mr Williams instructed counsel. In mitigation, the counsel was a friend of the client and counsel did not charge. But Mr Williams charged the client for his own attendance at the conference.
In the other, he received money from the client and obtained an expert report which was used in the defence. The client paid him £7,200 as the anticipated cost of the expert’s report but in the end it was less and Mr Williams retained the balance for about nine months after the case ended, during which time he deducted his fees.
The SDT said: “He stated that this retention was an oversight, and the tribunal accepted this was the case. It was, however, a serious oversight.
“There is, plainly, damage to the reputation of the solicitors’ profession in legal work being conducted by an individual who is without all regulation and who is uninsured… The public expect client money to be safe as if in a bank, not in a personal account, where it is at risk.”
After Frame Smith discovered the private arrangements, it terminated his consultancy and reported him to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Mr Williams admitted a lack of integrity but said his misconduct was caused by him “giving little or no thought to the regulations, which he accepted he should have done, in pursuit of what he believed was best for his client at the time”.
The solicitor had been before the SDT before, in 2015, when he was fined £3,000, but the SDT said there were “extenuating circumstances” that meant this was not a substantial factor.
It had “carefully considered whether to suspend the suspension order”, but “matters were too serious for this”.
The SDT said it was clear that Mr Williams was “a deeply caring individual, whose vocation is to try to help those who wish to leave sexual offending in their past” – he provided 41 character references from past clients, lawyers and others.
“This is a very worthy vocation. Unfortunately, this caring vocation was an impediment to his professional objectivity which was diminished. This would never change unless [he] re-evaluated everything he did professionally, and in his vocation, to ensure that each was in appropriate balance with the other.
“It was obvious that the way in which [Mr Williams] had practised his profession as a solicitor inevitably blurred the professional boundaries required between solicitor and client.”
He was suspended for six months and ordered to pay £5,000 in costs, reduced from over £10,000 on the grounds of limited means.
Leave a Comment