Skip to main content
discipline 3 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

T C J Paynter & Another

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number9306/2005
Date01/01/2005
OutcomeFine, Strike off

Allegation / charges

Client Money, Failures, Solicitors' Accounts Rules, Others

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

SanctionStrike Off
FineGBP 5,000
CostsGBP 15,000
Dishonesty foundYes

Two solicitors in the firm Kings faced allegations of client account breaches, misuse of client money, taking costs without bills, and failing to inform lender clients that actual purchase prices were lower than mortgage advances. Timothy Paynter, the sole principal, was found dishonest (applying Twinsectra and Bultitude) as he was either aware of or turned a blind eye to the misconduct, and had also allowed Max Kingsley (subject to a s.43 Order) to run an immigration practice through the firm, generating wasted costs orders. Paynter was struck off and ordered to pay £12,500 costs. The salaried partner (Respondent 2, name redacted) admitted the allegations but was found NOT dishonest - merely foolish and insufficiently robust; he was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £2,500 costs.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Paynter was sole principal responsible for the firm
  • Previous 2003 Tribunal reprimand against Paynter for Solicitors Accounts Rules breaches - should have been on notice
  • Allowed struck-off/section 43 individuals (Max Kingsley, Peter Hastings) to maintain connection with firm
  • Substantial loss to Law Society Compensation Fund (claims reaching £3.2 million)
  • Widespread rather than isolated failures; shortfall of some £300,000
  • Vulnerable immigration clients affected

Mitigating factors:

  • For Respondent 2: was effectively an employee/salaried partner with no control over administration
  • Respondent 2 deceived by others and placed in difficult position by trainee Miss Q
  • Respondent 2 acted in only a small number of the transactions
  • Respondent 2 fully cooperated and admitted allegations at earliest opportunity
  • Respondent 2's long unblemished 30-year career, community service and strong testimonials
  • Respondent 2 already suffered heavily - bankruptcy, conditions on practising certificate, financial hardship
  • For Paynter: ill health (strokes), apology and shame regarding wasted costs orders

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/9306/