A solicitor ‘went off the rails’ and dishonestly u
A solicitor ‘went off the rails’ and dishonestly used pnds stlg 27,000 of clients money when his wife found out he was cheating on her, a tribunal heard.
Philip Holliday, 55, was thrown out of the profession after the hearing was told how he used some of the money to meet a pnds stlg 13,500 VAT bill and keep his firm afloat.
Holliday, the chairman of his local Citizens Advice Bureau, took the cash while running his own practice in Swanley, Kent.
The lawyer, of Oldfield Close, Bickley, near Bromley, Kent, had been under ‘extreme personal turmoil’ after his wife, who organised the firm’s books, found out about his infidelity.
He admitted a string of breaches of the accounts rules at the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal
but denied dishonesty.
The panel found him guilty of ‘conscious impropriety’ and ordered his expulsion from the profession.
Geoffrey Williams, for the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors said the misconduct was uncovered during a Law Society inspection of the firm, Philip Holliday, based in (46) High Street, Swanley in January 2001.
The accountant discovered Holliday had made improper transfers of cash, totalling pnds stlg 27,000 during 1999, the tribunal heard.
The money had been replaced although there was still a cash shortage of pnds stlg 4,406.
07 on the accounts, said Mr Williams.
‘They relate to improper payments out of client account either by duplicating transfers, overpayments or over transfers into office account,’ Mr Williams said.
The tribunal heard that Holliday claimed he was entitled to the money for legal work.
But in many cases no bills had been sent to the customers, said Mr Williams.
He added: ‘The cash shortages were created by improper transfers by Mr Holliday.
‘These were deliberately carried out and it has to be said, carried out on a speculative basis.
‘There was a benefit to him in the reduction of the overdraft, an increase in credit on the office account and the ability to pay the VAT cheque.
‘I do not for a moment allege criminality but I do allege conscious impropriety, with wilful breaches of the accounts rules where client funds were going into office account.
‘Dishonest or not, this is an example of very serious misconduct by Mr Holliday.
‘
The tribunal heard that Holliday sold the practice in May 2001 and has not worked as a solicitor since.
But he told the hearing that he wanted to resume work as a lawyer.
Holliday said: ‘It is all I have ever done in my life.
‘I don’t know what I would do otherwise.
‘
He added: ‘I was in a state of shock at being investigated.
I did not think I had done anything wrong.
‘I was stunned at the suggestion of what I had done was dishonest.
‘
Referring to the allegations Gerald Lynch defending asked Holliday: ‘This was at a time when you had an extra marital relationship is it not?
Holliday replied: ‘Yes.
‘
Mr Lynch added: ‘Your wife knew of it?
Holliday added: ‘Yes.
‘
The lawyer continued: ‘The accounts department was running and my wife continued to operate it but we were not communicating.
‘
The tribunal heard Holliday later patched up his marriage.
But Mr Lynch added: ‘It put into question the relationship with his own wife.
‘It was not just a wife at home.
It is the bookeeper.
‘It was a double whammy.
Personal turmoil is added to the intense pressure already existing in his office.
‘Is it any wonder that to a degree he went off the rails in 1999 for the first time?’
Mr Lynch continued: ‘This is a case where there was a manifest failure to observe the accounts rules.
This is not a dishonest activity.
‘
The tribunal heard that the money has been repaid with no loss to any clients.
But chairman John Potter said: ‘We are drawn to the conclusion the respondent has acted with conscious impropriety.
‘We have to prioritise the public interest.
‘The sanction for acts of dishonesty or conscious impropriety is clear and well known.
‘We order that the respondent be struck off the roll of solicitors.
‘
Holliday was also ordered to pay pnds stlg 9,000 in costs.
ends
