Solicitor fined for amending property deed without client consent

Laura Sainsbury, a solicitor at Prince Evans Solicitors LLP, located at Craven House, 40-44 Uxbridge Road, London W5 2BS, was fined following a decision by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) on 23 May 2024. The SRA found her guilty of multiple breaches of professional conduct principles, resulting in a financial penalty and additional costs.

The decision to fine Laura Sainsbury arose from her actions surrounding the amendment and submission of a property transfer deed without proper client authorisation. The SRA detailed several allegations and breaches as follows:

1. Unauthorised Amendment of Deed: On or around 2 May 2018, Laura Sainsbury removed the signature page from a Form TR1 executed by her client and attached it to an amended version without the client’s knowledge or consent. This act breached Principles 2 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011, which require solicitors to act with integrity and maintain public trust.

2. Submission of Improperly Executed Deed: On the same date, she facilitated the submission of the amended Form TR1 to HM Land Registry, knowing it had not been properly executed by the transferor client. This further violated Principles 2 and 6.

3. Incorrect Property Value Entry: On or around 8 May 2018, Laura Sainsbury failed to obtain accurate instructions from the transferor client regarding the property value, leading to an incorrect entry on the title register. This breached Principles 2 and 4, the latter mandating that solicitors act in the best interests of their clients.

4. Failure to Report Misconduct: Laura Sainsbury did not report the misconduct to the SRA promptly, or at all, when she became aware of the client’s concerns on or around 21 August 2019. This was a breach of Outcome 10.4 of the SRA Code of Conduct 2011, which requires solicitors to report serious misconduct.

5. Reckless Behaviour: In relation to the first two allegations, Laura Sainsbury was found to have acted recklessly.

Sanction and rationale

The SRA imposed a financial penalty of £10,146 on Laura Sainsbury, and she was ordered to pay costs of £1,350. The decision considered several factors:

• Seriousness of Conduct: Laura Sainsbury’s conduct was classified under conduct band C of the SRA Enforcement Strategy, due to its serious nature and potential for causing significant harm, even though no actual harm occurred.

• Aggravating Factors: Her admissions of acting without integrity, failure to report her conduct, and her position as an experienced solicitor responsible for her own actions aggravated the situation.

• Mitigating Factors: Laura Sainsbury’s admissions of misconduct, genuine remorse, attempts to rectify the issues, and the fact that this was an isolated incident mitigated the penalty. Importantly, she had not acted dishonestly or for personal gain.

The financial penalty was reduced by 15% in recognition of Laura Sainsbury’s cooperation with the investigation and her efforts to address the misconduct.

conclusion

Laura Sainsbury’s case highlights the importance of integrity, proper client authorisation, and adherence to regulatory requirements in legal practice. The SRA’s decision and imposed fine reflect the seriousness of her breaches and serve as a cautionary example to the legal profession.