Suspension for direct access barrister who took money from client’s bank account


BSB: barrister failed in his obligations

BSB: barrister failed in his obligations

A barrister who withdrew £2,000 from a lay client’s bank account without permission or warning, and also failed to co-operate with both the Bar Standards Board and Legal Ombudsman over complaints against him, has been suspended for three months.

A Bar Disciplinary Tribunal found that Stephen Supple was acting for Graham Phillips on a direct access basis but, after taking £1,978 from his bank account by direct debit, failed to explain to his client why he had done this or respond to requests to return the money.

The tribunal said Mr Supple would have been entitled to some payment for the work he had carried out, but he acted inappropriately and unprofessionally, in a manner likely to diminish public confidence in the profession.

He received three suspensions of one month and two suspensions of three months for the five charges against him, to run concurrently. He was also prohibited from undertaking public access work for 12 months.

Sara Jagger, the BSB’s director of professional conduct, said: “The public has a right to expect members of the Bar to act competently and professionally. By mishandling the client’s monies and then not cooperating with the regulators during the investigation, Mr Supple failed in his obligations.

“The tribunal’s order sends a clear message that unprofessional conduct which diminishes the public’s confidence in the Bar has consequences.”

Direct access barristers are starting to crop up in disciplinary cases more frequently, such as Oliver White, who twice handled client money when he should not have done, and Tariq Rehman, who was ‘named and shamed’ by the Legal Ombudsman for the number of complaints arising from his direct access immigration work.




    Readers Comments

  • R Drury says:

    If he’d been a solicitor he would have been struck off. No question.

    Where is the consistency of approach to protect the public?


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Email address will not be published.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


Mind the (justice) gap: Why are RTAs going up but claims still down?

The gap between the number of road traffic accident injuries and the number of motor injury claims continues to widen, according to the latest government data.


Five key issues to consider when adopting an AI-based legal tech

As generative AI starts to play a bigger role in our working lives, there are some key issues that your law firm needs to consider when adopting an AI-based legal tech.


Bulk litigation – not always working in consumers interests

For consumers to get the benefit, bulk litigation needs to be done well, and we are increasingly concerned that there are significant problems in some areas of this market.


Loading animation