Skip to main content
discipline 3 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Robert Lloyd Moseley

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number10922/2012
Date01/01/2012
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Failures, Others

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

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 26,095
Dishonesty foundNo

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found all four allegations proved against Robert Lloyd Moseley, a solicitor. Following a 2006 bankruptcy, the Respondent failed to disclose his freehold reversionary interest in a property to the Official Receiver, held himself out as able to transfer that interest, received £12,333.98 from proposed purchasers, and used the funds to pay other debts rather than returning them. The Tribunal found he acted with a lack of integrity and in a way likely to diminish public trust; the Applicant expressly made no allegation of dishonesty. The Tribunal ordered that he be struck off the Roll and pay costs of £26,094.72, not to be enforced without leave given his limited means. His appeal on sanction was dismissed by the High Court.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Took advantage of a mistake made by the purchasers' solicitors
  • Disbursed the money to pay other unsecured creditors when he should not have
  • Failed to repay funds despite several requests over two years
  • Disregarded written directions supplied following the Bankruptcy Order
  • Purchasers lost money while Respondent unlawfully benefitted
  • Conduct described as disgraceful; Tribunal considered him a risk to the public
  • Previous appearance before the Tribunal in 2007 (reprimanded)

Mitigating factors:

  • No allegation of dishonesty made by the Applicant
  • Living frugally with relatives and of limited means
  • Difficult personal period around the time of bankruptcy
  • Working to rebuild practice as a consultant
  • Made offers to repay funds (though not accepted)

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/10922/