News Editor, Solicitors Journal

Conveyancing assistant disqualified by SRA for misleading other side

22 Nov 2021News

The SRA found her actions dishonest and in breach of the SRA Principles

A conveyancing assistant has been disqualified under section 99 of the Legal Services Act 2007 and ordered to pay £600 costs, after she misled opponent solicitors about the progress of a conveyancing matter.

Rima Rampersaud was employed as a conveyancing assistant by Guardian Wills and Probate Services Ltd in Potters Bar and had been with the company since August 2014.

It was found that between 5 March 2019 and 8 August 2019, the conveyancing assistant sent four emails on a client matter which misled opponent solicitors about the progress of a conveyancing matter. The SRA ruled that her conduct was dishonest and breached SRA Principles 2 (act with integrity) and 6 (behave in a way that maintains the public’s trust in you and the profession).

The SRA made Rampersaud subject to a disqualification order, which prevents her from holding any of the following roles in a licensed practice: head of legal practice, head of finance and administration, manager or employee.

Rampersaud was also ordered to pay the SRA’s costs of £600.

Legal News desk contact: editorial@solicitorsjournal.com|

Rima Rampersaud was employed as a conveyancing assistant by Guardian Wills and Probate Services Ltd in Potters Bar and had been with the company since August 2014.

Rampersaud was also ordered to pay the SRA’s costs of £600.

Latest Articles

Employment tribunal cases rising sharply

Recent Ministry of Justice figures reveal a significant increase in open Employment Tribunal cases and challenges faced by employers

SRA updates guidance for litigation supervision

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has enhanced its supervision guidelines to clarify litigation conduct after recent court rulings

Millions of fathers lack parental responsibility

Many fathers may be surprised to learn about their parental responsibility rights and how to secure them

Re Poundstretcher: cross-class cramdown survives even when six landlord classes say no

The Chancery Division sanctions Poundstretcher's restructuring plan despite six dissenting landlord classes, applying the Adler and Petrofac framework.

Ponsford v Sali: a property partnership's messy divorce shows why documentation wins partnership disputes

The Chancery Division takes a pragmatic, evidence based approach to untangling a property partnership built on undocumented cash dealings.

North Somerset District Council v Secretary of State: failing the flood sequential test is not the end of the story

The Planning Court confirms that a failed flood risk sequential test still gets weighed in the planning balance, not treated as an automatic refusal.

Thomas Armstrong (Aggregates) v Housing Secretary: when landfill buries a quarry's right to be reviewed

The Planning Court applies Pilkington and Hillside to find a 1954 quarry permission can no longer be revived under the ROMP regime.

Clerkenwell Lifestyle v HG Construction: be careful what you call "agreed" in extension of time correspondence

The TCC enforces a £955,943 adjudication award after rejecting a contractor's late attempt to recast email exchanges as a binding settlement.

Ward v Donnellan: when both sides lie, "no order for costs" is not a free pass

The Court of Appeal overturns a no order for costs ruling, finding a judge let a dishonest claimant off too lightly.

London Borough of Camden v BW: when a single missing fact can decide a capacity case

The Court of Protection finds an expert's failure to explore one consequence, losing a placement, was enough to undermine his capacity assessment.

Griffiths v Essex County Council: EAT clarifies causation in discrimination remedy awards and sends pension loss back for recalculation

A single act of indirect disability discrimination can ground a full loss of earnings award, even where a later constructive dismissal claim was framed only...