Skip to main content
discipline 3 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Alan Matthew Avetoom & Another

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number10208/2009
Date01/01/2009
OutcomeReprimand, Strike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Client Money, Delays, Failures, Solicitors' Accounts Rules, Others

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

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 35,500
Dishonesty foundNo

Sole practitioner Alan Matthew Avetoom faced numerous allegations relating to failure to register a lease, failure to respond to correspondence and the regulator, multiple Solicitors Accounts Rules breaches, practising without a practising certificate, providing inaccurate information, failing to disclose a second client account, failing to disclose material facts to lender clients in sub-sale transactions, and breaches of undertakings. Eighteen allegations were proved or admitted. The Tribunal expressly found the conduct did NOT involve dishonesty but was reckless and fell below required standards of integrity. He was struck off and ordered to pay £35,500 costs (not to be enforced without leave). The Second Respondent, a nominal/'sleeping' partner living in Thailand, had two SAR allegations proved but was found not to have intended to be a sleeping partner; he was reprimanded and ordered to pay £2,000 costs.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Reckless conduct - not caring whether statements were true, stating position to remove the problem
  • Breaches spanned a wide range of practice affecting clients, professional colleagues and regulator
  • Exposed lender clients to risk

Mitigating factors:

  • Youth and previous good character (no prior disciplinary sanctions)
  • Medical problems and personal difficulties
  • Pressure from police investigation and running a practice
  • Replaced the c.£19,000 client account shortfall from own funds
  • Did not abandon practice and tried to deal with intervention
  • Frank with the Tribunal; accepted better suited to employed practice

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/10208/