Result of the Raleys SDT prosecution
17 February 2009
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal today announced its decision following its hearing of allegations of misconduct by partners of Raleys Solicitors, of Barnsley, South Yorkshire, in relation to the miners' health compensation scheme.
The allegations and the Tribunal's decision in each instance are:
- that Raleys acted in breach of Rule 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Solicitors' Practice Rules 1990 (SPR) in that they obtained loans of £4 million from their client, the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), without ensuring that the NUM took any independent legal advice and as such acted in circumstances of conflict whereby their interests conflicted with those of their client.
PROVED
- that Raleys's relationship with the NUM was contrary to Rule 1 of the SPR in that they compromised their independence and integrity and duty to act in the best interests of clients pursuing miners' compensation claims ("the clients") and/or the reputation of the profession by:
- (i) acting and/or continuing to act in circumstances of conflict and/or significant risk of conflict of interest between (i) the interests of their clients and their own interests in maintaining a relationship with the NUM and/or (ii) the interests of their clients and the interests of the NUM in breach of Practice Rule 1(a) and/or
- (ii) failing to advise their clients that they were free to instruct solicitors of their own choice and/or
- (iii) advising and/or encouraging clients pursuing respiratory disease claims to enter into agreements with the NUM ("the NUM funding agreement") providing for the deduction of union subscriptions and administration fees which were contrary to the clients' best interests and/or
- (iv) failing to give any or any adequate advice to clients pursuing VWF [vibration white finger] claims on agreements the clients had purportedly entered into with the NUM and the merits of making payments to the NUM.
PROVED
- that contrary to Practice Rule 1(a), (c) and (d) and Practice Rule 15 and the Solicitors' Cost Information and Client Care Code 1999, Raleys failed properly to advise their clients by
- (i) providing incomplete and/or inaccurate advice concerning the benefits and/or apparent liabilities of the NUM funding agreement; and/or
- (ii) failing to give sufficient information to their clients about costs and/or the funding of claims generally, including alternative methods of funding.
PROVED
- that contrary to Rule 9 of the SPR Raleys entered into an arrangement for the introduction of clients and/or acted in association with the NUM whom are not solicitors and whose business or part of whose business is to make, support or prosecute claims arising from death or personal injury and who in the course of such business solicit or receive contingency fees.
NOT PROVED
- that Raleys acted in breach of Practice Rule 3 of the SPR 1990 and/or the Solicitors Introduction and Referral Code 1990 ("the Code") and/or are guilty of conduct unbefitting a solicitor, by entering into an agreement with Zuko Legal Limited ("ZLL") to make payments to them as a reward which would have been in breach of s2(3) of the Code prior to March 2004 and/or subsequently making payments to ZLL in breach of Paragraph 2A of the Code as amended after March 2004.
PROVED
- that the respondents are guilty of conduct unbefitting a solicitor and/or in breach of Practice Rule 1(d) in that they failed to comply with Adjudicators' decisions made in respect of Inadequate Professional Services ("IPS") whereby they were directed to pay compensation to various complainants and costs to the Law Society pursuant to Schedule 1A of the Solicitors Act 1974 (as amended) ("the Act") and an Order pursuant to paragraph 5(2) of the Act is sought in relation to these matters.
THE TRIBUNAL UPHELD THE ADJUDICATORS' DECISIONS AND ORDERED THE COMPENSATION TO BE PAID. MISCONDUCT NOT PROVEN.
The Tribunal made the following orders:
- David Peter Barber (born 22 November 1964, admitted to the Roll of Solicitors 16 October 1989)
SUSPENDED FROM PRACTICE FOR TWO YEARS
- Derek Ian Firth (born 3 January 1949, admitted 16 April 1983)
SUSPENDED FROM PRACTICE FOR FOUR YEARS
- Carol Ann Gill (born 23 October 1970, admitted 2 November 1998)
FINED £10,000
- James William Edward Gladman (born 22 November 1959, admitted 15 October 1987)
FINED £10,000
- Jonathan Timothy James Markham (born 9 April 1962, admitted 1 November 1996)
SUSPENDED FROM PRACTICE FOR SIX MONTHS
- Katherine Anne Richards (born 7 April 1968, admitted 15 October 1992)
FINED £10,000
The Tribunal ordered the respondents to pay all costs. An interim payment of £300,000 is to be made within 28 days.
Comment
SRA Chief Executive Antony Townsend said: "The public are entitled to rely upon their solicitor to act in their best interests. Solicitors who compromise their clients' interests will face prosecution by the SRA."
Notes
According to a parliamentary answer given by Energy and Climate Change Minister Mike O'Brien MP on 28 October 2008, Raleys has handled 48,903 claims for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and 11,279 claims for vibration white finger.
Replying to a further question by John Mann MP, on 4 February 2009, Mike O'Brien MP disclosed that Raleys Solicitors had been paid £77,949,197 by his department and its predecessors in costs in respect of the coal health compensation scheme.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal is independent of both the Law Society and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (the prosecutor).