§ discipline
‹ Browse decisions

Simon John Holborn

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number10672/2010
Date01/01/2010
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Solicitors' Accounts Rules

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 23,000
Dishonesty foundYes

Sole practitioner Simon John Holborn faced 13 allegations including breaches of the Solicitors Accounts Rules, failure to comply with IPS/adjudicator decisions, failure to cooperate with the SRA, failure to fulfil an undertaking, and using his position to take unfair advantage of a client. He admitted the facts but denied dishonesty and did not attend the hearing (his adjournment application was refused). The Tribunal found dishonesty proved in respect of round-sum withdrawals from client account to prop up his practice and personal finances (allegation 1.1) and failure to disclose a County Court Judgment on his PII proposal form (allegation 1.2). Dishonesty was not proved on allegations 1.9 and 1.12. He was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay costs of £23,000. The Tribunal also directed that four IPS decisions be enforceable as High Court Orders.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Considerable scale of misconduct
  • Repetitive round sum transfers totalling considerable sums
  • Use of client account to support personal and business finances
  • Financial astuteness in transferring just enough to stay within overdraft
  • Multiple complaints from several clients
  • Failure to comply with multiple adjudicator decisions
  • Deceiving professional indemnity insurer for personal benefit

Mitigating factors:

  • Financial difficulties
  • Repayment of the shortfall
  • Did not take steps to hide the transfers
  • Closure of practice and loss of home
  • No previous disciplinary matters
  • Commitment not to handle client account monies in future and to re-educate himself

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/10672/