Lindsey M Fettes

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

Andrew Medley, a trust beneficiary, appealed under s42ZA(10) of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 against a PCSC decision to take no action on his complaint that solicitor Lindsey Fettes failed to respond to correspondence from his agents. The Tribunal found the PCSC had relied on an irrelevant factor (that the solicitor was awaiting a response from another firm) and reached a finding (a two-month delay) contradictory to the evidence (which showed roughly five and a half months), applying Hood, Petitioner. It allowed the appeal, quashed the decision and upheld the complaint of unsatisfactory professional conduct under s46(1) of the 2007 Act for breach of Rule B1.9.1. The Tribunal had no power to fine or censure but awarded the Appellant £750 compensation for inconvenience and distress, found the Law Society liable in expenses (taxed at £18.00 unit rate), and directed publicity. No dishonesty was found.

Duties found breached:

• No improper communication with the court
• Uphold public trust in the profession

Aggravating factors:

• One previous finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct against the Second Respondent
• Prolonged failure to respond (in fact approximately five and a half months rather than the two months found by the PCSC)
• Previous reference to delay in correspondence

Mitigating factors:

• Conduct assessed as at the lower end of the scale of seriousness
• Staffing issues and periods of sickness raised by the solicitor (treated as mitigation)