David John Barratt

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

Respondent solicitor took over a boundary dispute for clients Mr and Mrs O in April 2000 and, over the period to January 2003, repeatedly lied to them: falsely claiming he had instructed counsel (Mr Bickford-Smith), inventing reasons for delay, claiming to have instructed two further barristers, and arranging and cancelling four fictitious site visits. He never instructed counsel and undertook no work after June 2001. He admitted both allegations and admitted dishonesty. The Tribunal found the allegations substantiated and found he had persistently lied over a long period, was a danger to clients and the profession's reputation. Mitigation (work pressure, supervision offer, apology) was rejected. He had a prior 2003 Tribunal appearance (breach of undertaking, fined £2,500). He was struck off and ordered to pay costs of £3,316.

Duties found breached:

• Not mislead third parties or opponents
• Handle inadvertently received material

Aggravating factors:

• Persistent lying to clients over a prolonged period (April 2000 - January 2003)
• Course of conduct, not a momentary aberration
• Respondent was a danger to clients and to the reputation of the profession
• Prior Tribunal appearance in February 2003 (breach of undertaking)
• Clients felt very let down and misled

Mitigating factors:

• Admitted both allegations and admitted dishonesty
• Wrote a letter of apology to clients
• No financial gain to the Respondent
• Clients' legal rights not ultimately compromised; matter resolved
• Under pressure at work and at home
• Positive evidence from current employer/supervisor Mr Hackett (95%+ client satisfaction)