Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Timothy Charles Elkins

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number11429/2015
Date01/01/2015
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Failures, Solicitors' Accounts Rules

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

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 55,676
Dishonesty foundYes

Timothy Charles Elkins, a solicitor at Johnson and Gaunt, implemented four SDLT mitigation schemes (Unlimited Company, Option, Crystal and Jovian) across 80 conveyancing transactions, avoiding some £1.3m of SDLT. The Tribunal found he failed to disclose the schemes to lender clients, failed to act in the best interests of purchaser clients, acted where there was a significant risk of conflict, failed to have proper referral agreements, kept inadequate accounting records, and misused client funds. These non-dishonesty breaches were found to stem from careless disregard rather than a lack of integrity. However, the Tribunal made express findings of dishonesty (applying the Twinsectra test) in respect of Allegations 1.7 (backdating Crystal Scheme documents), 1.8 (submitting misleading SDLT1 forms to HMRC when no valid scheme was in place) and 1.9 (failing to disclose full and accurate information to ITS/HMRC). Absent exceptional circumstances, the dishonesty required striking off. The Respondent was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay agreed proceedings costs of £55,675.60 plus investigation costs subject to detailed assessment.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Deliberate and repeated actions over three years
  • Element of pre-planning in that breaches persisted for a year after the March 2012 Budget
  • Concealment of wrongdoing (finding under Allegation 1.9)
  • Respondent was experienced (30 years) at partner level with direct control
  • High level of culpability and harm to the profession

Mitigating factors:

  • Previously unblemished career
  • Impressive character references
  • Limited insight through admissions made in Answer and evidence
  • Co-operation with the investigation
  • Dishonesty was a cluster of acts precipitated by the March 2012 Budget rather than pre-planned conspiracy

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/11429/