Ian Heslop
Employee
7270963

Decision - Agreement

Outcome: Regulatory settlement agreement

Outcome date: 28 July 2025

Published date: 13 August 2025

Firm details

Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Co-operative Legal Services Ltd (CLS)

Address(es): 1 Angel Square, Manchester, M60 0AG, England

Firm ID: 567391

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by agreement.

Decision details

1. Agreed outcome

1.1 Ian Heslop, who was an Estate Planning Consultant at Co-operative Legal Services Ltd (CLS), agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of his conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

1. to the SRA making an order under section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (a section 43 order) in relation to Ian Heslop that, from the date of this agreement:
1. no solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with his practice as a solicitor
2. no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the solicitor's practice
3. no recognised body shall employ or remunerate him
4. no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the business of that body
5. no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to be a manager of the body
6. no recognised body or manager or employee of such body shall permit him to have an interest in the body

except in accordance with the SRA's prior permission.

2. to the publication of this agreement
3. he will pay the costs of the investigation of £300.

2. Summary of facts

2.1 Ian Heslop was a self-employed Estate Planning Consultant for CLS who worked under the supervision of a solicitor.

2.2 In October 2024 clients (the donors) instructed CLS to draft a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA).

2.3 In November 2024 CLS sent the draft LPA to the donor and the two attorneys for them to review and sign. The LPA needed to be signed by both the donor and attorney, and their signatures must be witnessed.

2.4 In November 2024 Mr Heslop falsely signed the LPA as having witnessed the donor and the two attorneys’ signing the LPA. However, Mr Heslop was not in their presence when they had signed it.

2.5 As Mr Heslop did not witness the signatures of the donor and the two attorneys, it rendered the LPA invalid.

2.6 Mr Heslop made admissions to CLS and in January 2025 was dismissed for gross misconduct.

3. Admissions

3.1 Ian Heslop makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:

1. he admits signing the LPA and falsely stating that he had witnessed the signatures of the donor and the two attorneys
2. that his conduct makes it undesirable for him to be involved in a legal practice
3. that his conduct set out above was dishonest.

4. Why a section 43 order is appropriate

4.1 The SRA's Enforcement Strategy and its guidance on how it regulates nonauthorised persons, sets out its approach to using section 43 orders to control where a non-authorised person can work.

4.2 When considering whether a section 43 order is appropriate in this matter, the SRA has taken into account the admissions made by Ian Heslop and the following mitigation which he has put forward:

1. he thought that by signing the LPA in the way described, he was acting in the best interests of the donor for their needs and circumstances
2. he recognises that he should not have falsely signed the LPA and instead he should have made arrangements for the LPA to be properly witnessed
3. he has shown insight and remorse and acknowledges the distress this caused.

4.3 The SRA and Ian Heslop agree that a section 43 order is appropriate because:

1. Ian Heslop is not a solicitor
2. he carried out work in the name of, or under the direction or supervision of a, solicitor means that, he was involved in a legal practice
3. by acting dishonestly Ian Heslop has occasioned or been party to an act or default in relation to a legal practice.

4.4 Ian Heslop's conduct makes it undesirable for him to be involved in a legal practice because he has admitted to falsely stating that he had witnessed the signatures of the donor and two attorneys on the LPA.

5. Publication

5.1 The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory process. Ian Heslop agrees to the publication of this agreement.

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

6.1 Ian Heslop agrees that he will not deny the admissions made in this agreement or act in any way which is inconsistent with it.

7. Costs

7.1 Ian Heslop agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of £300. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.