Rebuke for solicitor who didn’t realise his client was dead


SRA: Solicitor’s conduct was reckless

A solicitor who did not realise that his client had died seven years previously when he purported to act for her has been rebuked by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

Ian Johnson, a partner at Knipe Woodhouse-Smith in Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire, took instructions from the dead client’s son without trying to contact her.

According to a regulatory settlement agreement published by the SRA yesterday, in July 2016 Mr Johnson was instructed to represent ‘Mrs B’ over a lease extension on a property she owned.

Mr Johnson took instructions from Mrs B’s son, Mr B, who was a long-standing client of the firm.

“Mr Johnson did not contact Mrs B to identify or verify her identity. Nor did he ensure that Mr B was authorised to give instruction on her behalf,” the agreement said.

The solicitor “undertook significant work on the matter” for the next 16 months, during which he referred to Mrs B as his client in correspondence.

In November 2017, after the documents for the lease extension had been agreed and were ready to be signed by the parties, Mr Johnson wrote to Mrs B, enclosing a copy of the documents for the lease extension, as well as his firm’s terms of engagement for Mrs B to sign. He also asked for documents verifying Mrs B’s identity and address.

This was the first time Mr Johnson had tried to contact Mrs B directly.

The following month, Mr B informed Mr Johnson that his mother had passed away in 2009. Mrs B’s estate had not yet been finalised.

“When Mr Johnson learned that Mrs B has died, he informed the other side and stopped acting in the matter,” the SRA recorded.

The solicitor admitted failing to achieve outcome 7.5 of the SRA Code of Conduct because he did not verify and identify his client at the start of the transaction, as required by Regulation 5(a) of the Money Laundering Regulations 2007.

Further, he breached principle 6 of the SRA Principles – “You must behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in you and in the provision of legal services”.

The SRA said the rebuke was an appropriate sanction for Mr Johnson’s “reckless” conduct, marking its “moderate seriousness” and the impact it had on the clients on the other side, but also recognising that there was no dishonesty or lack of integrity.




Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog


The future of holding client money

In the fallout from Axiom Ince, the SRA began talking about the possibility of introducing an alternative system to holding client money.


Why the RTA claims process is still flawed and how to fix it

Almost four years and more than a million claims on from the launch of the Official Injury Claim portal, the system designed to simplify the process is still beset with problems.


The CJC’s challenge – getting the litigation funding balance right

Anything beyond minimal regulation would be challenging to structure and enforce, and practitioners do not see it as viable to rely on the courts as a fallback.


Loading animation
loading