Earlier this year the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) demonstrated how seriously it treats a breach of a Regulatory Settlement Agreement (RSA) by an individual. A Solicitor, Mr Bryson, had previously entered into a RSA with the SRA in May 2010 pursuant to which he had undertaken to make all reasonable efforts to trace and contact affected clients, having previously made unjustified deductions from their damages in respect of a "brokers fee" paid to a referrer. In consideration of his entering into this RSA he was severely reprimanded by the SRA and ordered to pay the costs of the investigation as well as providing full restitution to all of the affected clients.
It became apparent that Mr Bryson did not contact the clients as he had agreed and his default was reported to the SDT. The SDT felt that Mr Bryson's good faith must be open to question. Mr Bryson was suspended from practice for an indefinite period and ordered to pay the SRA's costs of £20,000.00.
This was the first case the SRA has taken to the SDT where a party to an RSA has not complied with its terms. The SRA reported that in almost all cases, compliance with the terms of an RSA is excellent but the case demonstrates how seriously any default will be treated.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.