Martin Andrew Conroy

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

The Respondent, a solicitor operating a case management company and acting as a receiver/deputy for the Court of Protection, paid receivership funds belonging to two vulnerable clients (Ms EW and Ms GS) into his company's office accounts rather than client/receivership accounts. This eliminated his business overdraft and gave him personal financial benefit while exposing the clients to risk had his business failed. The Tribunal rejected his explanations as unconvincing, found it had jurisdiction under Rule 1.06, and applied the Twinsectra two-stage test to find his conduct dishonest both objectively and subjectively. He was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay costs of £5,096.

Duties found breached:

• No conflict between current clients
• No improper solicitation or touting
• No improper use of client money

Aggravating factors:

• Conduct involved vulnerable clients who deserved the highest standard of care
• Took unauthorised loans from vulnerable people for financial benefit
• Left vulnerable clients with less protection for their monies
• Status as solicitor lent credibility to his business dealings
• Funds only restored after the SRA pointed out the error

Mitigating factors:

• Paid interest to clients at 6%, greater than the receivership account rate
• Restored the funds and additional interest to the receivership accounts
• Voluntarily transferred his receiver functions to a new deputy
• Supportive statements from clients' families