Aidan Loy
Solicitor
027490

Decision - Sanction

Outcome: Rebuke

Outcome date: 29 January 2024

Published date: 1 March 2024

Firm details

Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: C4J Limited

Address(es): Saracen House, Crusader Road, Tritton Park, City Office Park, Lincoln, LN6 7AS

Firm ID: 8003076

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

Aidan Loy is a solicitor and manager of C4J Limited, located at Saracen House, Crusader Road, Tritton Park, City Office Park, Lincoln, a regulated body (the firm).

We have issued Mr Loy with a rebuke for making an unsolicited approach to 619 members of the public to offer the firm’s services, in breach of paragraph 8.9 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs 2019 and Principle 2 of the SRA Principles 2019.

On 28 March 2023, Mr Loy received an email from a client. Attached to that email, apparently inadvertently, was a spreadsheet containing the personal details of 963 individuals. The spreadsheet included contact details, bank information, tax information, and pay arrangements for these individuals.

On 5 April 2023, Mr Loy sent an email to 619 individuals named on the spreadsheet, none of whom were clients of the firm. In that email, Mr Loy informed the individuals that their data had been sent to him. He said that he could assist them in litigation to recover damages and invited them to instruct the firm to act.This was found to be a targeted and unsolicited marketing approach to members of the public, in breach of paragraph 8.9 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs 2019.

It was also found that Mr Loy had failed to act in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors’ profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons in breach of Principle 2 of the SRA Principles 2019.

Reasons/basis

It was decided that a rebuke was an appropriate and proportionate sanction.

Mr Loy was issued with a written rebuke and ordered to pay costs of £600.

This was because Mr Loy’s conduct was serious by reference to the following factors in the SRA Enforcement Strategy:

• Mr Loy, a senior solicitor and manager of the firm, was personally responsible for his conduct
• Mr Loy had shown no insight or remorse
• Some public sanction was required to protect the public interest and to ensure the behaviour was not repeated.

A more serious sanction was not considered to be proportionate by reference to the following factors in the Enforcement Strategy:

• There had been no lasting or significant harm
• There was no evidence that the behaviour had been repeated
• There was no evidence of dishonesty or a lack of integrity