Rajinder Sambi
Solicitor
339648

Decision - Agreement

Outcome: Regulatory settlement agreement

Outcome date: 21 September 2021

Published date: 30 September 2021

Firm details

Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Pennington Manches LLP

Address(es): Da Vinci House, Basing View, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 4EQ

Firm ID: 419884

Firm or organisation at date of publication

Name: Taylor Rose TTKW Limited

Address(es): 58 Borough High Street, London SE1 1XF

Firm ID: 623604

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by agreement.

Reasons/basis

1. Agreed outcome

1.1 Rajinder Sambi, formerly a solicitor of Pennington Manches Cooper LLP (the Firm) agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of her conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

1. she is rebuked
2. to the publication of this agreement
3. she will pay the costs of the investigation of £600.

2. Summary of Facts

2.1 Miss Sambi was employed by the Firm as an Associate Solicitor from 16 September 2013 to 21 December 2018.

2.2 The Firm was instructed by Mr O in relation to the purchase of a residential property, comprising of a freehold property and leasehold parking space (collectively referred to as the Property). The purchase of the Property was completed on 19 December 2014.

2.3 An application to register the transfer of the Property was made by Miss Sambi to Her Majesty’s Land Registry (HMLR) in early 2015.

2.4 Requisitions were raised by HMLR by letter dated 15 June 2015 and emailed to Miss Sambi on the same day.

2.5 Further correspondence was sent by HMLR to Miss Sambi dated 6 July 2015, 16 July 2015, 19 September 2015 and 12 October 2015. A letter from HMLR, dated 23 October 2015, confirmed that in the absence of a response to requisitions, the application to register the transfer of the Property had been cancelled.

2.6 No further action was taken on the file until Miss Sambi was contacted by Mr O in September 2017. Despite subsequent correspondence with Mr O discussing the failure to transfer the Property on several occasions between September 2017 and August 2018, Miss Sambi did not apply to HMLR to register the transfer of the Property until October 2018. Miss Sambi believes that she asked a colleague to submit a further application in late 2017, however no such application was made, and Miss Sambi did not check on its progress.

2.7 The registration of the Property was completed in 2019.

3. Admissions

3.1 Miss Sambi makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:

1. that by failing to progress the registration of Mr O’s property for a period of approximately four years she breached Principles 4 and 5 of the SRA Principles 2011.

4. Why a written rebuke is an appropriate outcome

4.1 The SRA’s Enforcement Strategy sets out its approach to the use of its enforcement powers where there has been a failure to meet its standards or requirements.

4.2 When considering the appropriate sanctions and controls in this matter, the SRA has taken into account the admissions made by Miss Sambi and the following mitigation which she has put forward:

1. Whilst accepting overall culpability for the delay, Miss Sambi believed at one point that the task of registration of the Property had been delegated and entrusted to a colleague.
2. At the relevant time she was experiencing challenging circumstances including considerable stress at work, suffering ill health, and dealing with a family bereavement.

4.3 The SRA considers that a written rebuke is the appropriate outcome because:

1. The breach was eventually rectified but the conduct continued for an unreasonable period taking into account its seriousness and persisted after Miss Sambi should have realised that it was improper.
2. The agreed outcome is a proportionate outcome in the public interest as it creates a credible deterrent to both Miss Sambi and others and upholds confidence in the delivery of legal services.
3. The conduct was neither trivial nor justifiably inadvertent.

5. Publication

5.1 The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process. Miss Sambi agrees to the publication of this agreement.

6. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement

6.1 Miss Sambi agrees that she will not deny the admissions made in this agreement or act in a way which is inconsistent with it.

6.2 If Miss Sambi denies the admissions or acts in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be considered further by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary outcome or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations.

6.3 Denying the admissions made or acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of principles 2 and 5 of the Principles and paragraph 7.3 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs.

7. Costs

7.1 Miss Sambi agrees to pay the costs of the SRA’s investigation in the sum of £600. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of cost due being issued by the SRA.