Shameer Farouk Sacranie - SFS Legal Ltd - J

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

The First Respondent, a sole director/principal of SFS Legal Limited, faced 20 allegations arising from two forensic investigations. The Tribunal proceeded in his absence after refusing an adjournment, finding he had deliberately absented himself without supporting medical evidence. It found 18 allegations against him proved (and 13 against the firm), including numerous Solicitors Accounts Rules breaches, operating banking facilities through client account, round-sum transfers, conflicts of interest, failure to disclose material facts to lender clients, misleading costs information on an SDLT mitigation scheme, and failure to cooperate. Critically, the Tribunal found express dishonesty (combined Twinsectra test) on allegations 1.18, 1.19 and 1.20, namely that he raised mortgages on properties for himself and his wife to fund his business, failed to register charges leaving lenders unsecured, used falsified mortgage applications, and misled lenders and the SRA. He was struck off and ordered to pay GBP 40,000 interim costs plus costs subject to detailed assessment. The firm's recognition was revoked (it had gone into liquidation as Alcimus Limited). Allegation 1.17 was not proved.

Duties found breached:

• Not mislead the court
• Proper basis for allegations
• No improper communication with the court
• No taking unfair advantage
• Act in the client's best interests
• Act only on proper, lawful instructions
• Disclose material information to client
• No conflict between current clients
• No improper use of client money
• Prompt accounting and return of money
• Diligence and timeliness
• Truthful, non-misleading advertising
• Not misrepresent regulated status

Aggravating factors:

• Dishonest conduct including misleading lenders and regulator
• Blatant disregard for professional obligations and core duties
• Used position as solicitor to obtain mortgage funds for own/wife's benefit
• Failure to register charges leaving lenders unsecured
• Serial re-mortgaging to fund his own business
• No remorse; relied on spurious untrue explanations
• Operated client account as banking facility lending legitimacy to transactions
• Failure to cooperate with the SRA

Mitigating factors:

• Some admissions made in correspondence regarding SAR breaches