Breaches of struck-off solicitor ‘strike at heart of conveyancing’

A solicitor has been struck off for misconduct related to a transaction for a £6 million property and the management of a £650,000 deposit – breaches which the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal said struck ‘at the heart of the conveyancing process and the trust and confidence the public have in their solicitors and the profession’.

Charles Michael Stevens, formerly of Bawtrees LLP in Witham, Essex, admitted giving misleading information to the seller’s solicitor about receiving a £650,000 deposit for the property on behalf of the purchaser, acting recklessly in doing so, and failing to perform an undertaking to transfer the funds and send the contract copy by the agreed date. Stevens subsequently attempted to prevent the matter being reported to the Law Society or the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

Acting on behalf of the purchaser, Stevens admitted sending a text to the seller’s solicitor, Lynne Goldsby of TWP Solicitors, indicating that the deposit due from his client was ‘in the system’ – despite not being in receipt of the funds. He also verbally confirmed he had received the deposit during a telephone call with Goldsby.

Stevens later clarified that he believed his client was in the process of transferring the deposit. However, the funds were not transferred and the buyers contract copy not sent to TWP as agreed.

In a subsequent email related to the matter, Stevens attempted to prevent TWP from reporting him to the SRA, writing: ‘My client agrees to the below on the basis that, as we mentioned before, this matter is then dropped and neither your firm or your clients proceed with any action against me or Bawtrees including reporting either to the Law Society or the SRA. If you can confirm this then I think we are agreed’.

The tribunal found the circumstances were connected rather than isolated incidents and said Stevens was ‘entirely culpable’ for ‘a breach of an undertaking in the conveyancing transaction and recklessness’. Although the motivation for the acts was not clear, the tribunal said it could be reasonably inferred that the need to complete on the high value deal ‘by whatever means’ played a significant role.

However, the tribunal said that misrepresentation in any conveyancing transaction, no matter the value, would be ‘extreme recklessness’.

The judgment noted:

“Undertakings within the context of conveyancing are characterised as providing the bedrock and foundation of the whole system and of fundamental importance in keeping it working. On a micro scale breaches cause disruption and delay to the transaction, stress for the seller and purchaser, and additional work for the solicitors on the other side of the transaction.

“On a macro scale such breaches strike at the heart of the conveyancing process and the trust and confidence the public have in their solicitors and the profession.”

Despite mitigating factors including an unblemished record, remorse, cooperation, and personal difficulties, the tribunal determined that the inherent seriousness of the misconduct outweighed these factors. Striking Stevens off the Roll of Solicitors, the tribunal said there was ‘a need to protect the public and the reputation of the profession’.