Mohammed Saleem

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

Mohammed Saleem, a solicitor formerly a consultant at MT UK Solicitors, faced allegations of failing to account for client money (UJ, Mr & Ms R, and KM) and creating a misleading statement. The Tribunal did not find Mr Tramboo or the accounts manager Monika to be convincing witnesses. Allegations 1.1 (UJ and Mr & Ms R) and 1.6.1 were not proved due to weak/hearsay evidence and absence of witnesses for cross-examination. Allegations 1.2-1.4 were proved (regarding KM): Mr Saleem provided his personal bank account details to Tolhurst instead of the firm's client account and received £100 belonging to client KM, failing to account for it. He was found to have breached Rule 14.1 SAR and Principles 2, 4, 6 and 10. The Tribunal expressly did NOT find dishonesty proved on any allegation, accepting Mr Saleem genuinely believed he was acting on his supervisor's plausible (if misguided) instruction and that he paid the money to Mr Tramboo. Allegations 1.6.2 and 1.6.3 were factually proved but no breaches found as they relied on the unproved 1.6.1. The Tribunal found a lack of integrity (not dishonesty) and imposed a fine of £7,750 and costs of £10,513 (reduced by two-thirds as the SRA was unsuccessful on the most serious aspects).

Duties found breached:

• Act in the client's best interests
• Integrity
• No improper use of client money
• Prompt accounting and return of money
• Uphold public trust in the profession

Aggravating factors:

• Mr Saleem knew or ought reasonably to have known that the conduct was in material breach of obligations to protect the public and the reputation of the legal profession

Mitigating factors:

• Single episode of relatively brief duration
• Previously unblemished career with no prior disciplinary findings
• Engaged with the Regulator during the investigation
• Demonstrated genuine insight and remorse
• Made appropriate admissions to some allegations
• Acted on the instructions/direction of his more experienced supervisor Mr Tramboo who exerted control over him
• Limited experience (3.5 years)
• The £100 remained in his account for less than 24 hours and was handed to Mr Tramboo
• Took positive remedial steps including attending an SRA Anti-Money Laundering course and obtaining a mentor

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["review_dishonesty_finding_cue_present"]