Martine Germaine Bisiaux

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

The Law Society alleged the Respondent, as Cashroom Partner of a volume conveyancing firm (Conveyancing Direct), breached Rule B6.11.1 by failing/unduly delaying in returning client funds, and Rule B6.13.2 by failing to acquire/maintain the skills of a Cashroom Manager. A 2019 inspection found historic client/invested fund balances; after a November 2021 intervention, large numbers of client credit balances were identified (593 credit balances totalling £829,547.50; ~£44,702.19 remaining unallocated as of February 2025). Although a Joint Minute admitted the facts and the Respondent purported to admit misconduct, the Fiscal declined to treat the Part A misconduct averments as agreed. The Tribunal found significant contradictions in the Complainers' case, insufficient evidence that funds were inappropriately held (given the volume conveyancing context), and no basis to assess the standard of conduct. It held the Complainers had not established breaches of the Rules and found the Respondent Not Guilty of Professional Misconduct.

Mitigating factors:

• Respondent entered into a Joint Minute and cooperated fully with the Complainers
• Respondent herself invited the Law Society to intervene
• Respondent suffered ill-health and was unable to continue as sole practitioner
• Relationship breakdown with former partner; locked out of premises and IT system disabled, removing the business from her control