Peter Elston Germain

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

The Respondent, admitted in 1997, acted for Client A in a personal injury claim which was struck out on 2 November 2012 due to failure to comply with orders on appointing an expert. On 20 December 2012 he wrote a deliberately false letter to Client A stating that her claim had been settled for £5,000 plus costs, that an offer remained open, and that costs would be recovered from insurers, when in fact the claim had been struck out and he personally paid her £12,500 (borrowed from a friend). He claimed the deception was to placate Client A's partner, Mr B. The Tribunal found all aspects of allegation 1.1 proved (breaches of Principles 2, 4, 5 and 6) and found dishonesty proved under the Twinsectra two-limb test. Finding no exceptional circumstances, the Tribunal struck him off and assessed costs at £7,869 (reduced from £22,830 claimed).

Duties found breached:

• Act in the client's best interests
• Honesty
• Integrity
• Non-discriminatory acceptance and cab-rank
• Uphold public trust in the profession

Aggravating factors:

• Dishonesty alleged and found proved
• Conduct was calculated and deliberate
• Respondent ought reasonably to have known conduct breached obligations to protect public and reputation of profession
• Planned conduct over period 6 November to 20 December 2012

Mitigating factors:

• No previous disciplinary findings; otherwise unblemished career
• Single incident of misconduct
• Acted to help the client
• Reimbursed the client (£12,500) for struck-out claim
• Genuinely regretful and did not dispute factual basis