Preeti King

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

Preeti King, a solicitor and former director of King Solicitors (UK) Ltd, faced allegations under both a Rule 5 and Rule 7 Statement. She was convicted at Woolwich Crown Court of perjury (wilful making of a false/untrue statement on oath) arising from evidence given in the trial of a Mr HA, receiving a six-month suspended sentence. The Tribunal relied on the certificate of conviction, found no exceptional circumstances to go behind it, and found allegations 1.1 and 1.2 proved with express dishonesty. In a conveyancing transaction after her firm closed, she held herself out (allegation 2.1 - not proved to criminal standard) and used a personal bank account trading as 'Morgans Solicitors' which she represented to the buyer's solicitor as a client account (allegation 2.2 - found dishonest). She also failed to arrange run-off insurance cover, failed to cooperate with the SRA investigation and to produce records, and had entered an improper referral arrangement with HA that was not in writing while failing to provide client-care information. The Tribunal found dishonesty proved on the perjury and the bank account matters and, finding no exceptional circumstances and a breath-taking lack of insight, ordered her struck off the Roll and to pay costs of £36,000.

Duties found breached:

• Integrity
• Uphold public trust in the profession
• Act in the client's best interests
• No conflict between current clients
• Professional indemnity insurance
• Cooperate openly with regulators
• Report serious misconduct of others

Aggravating factors:

• Criminal conviction for perjury (wilful making of a false statement on oath)
• Deliberate and carefully planned misrepresentation of a bank account as a client account, motivated by self-preservation
• Placed client funds and a fellow firm of solicitors at risk
• Complete lack of insight into her misconduct
• Evasive, contradictory and incredible witness who selectively produced documents
• Continued to dispute that she had been convicted of perjury

Mitigating factors:

• No previous disciplinary appearances before the Tribunal
• Self-reported (though given little weight as conviction would have come to light anyway)
• Poor medical condition (limited evidence, no impact on state of mind at material time)
• Difficult financial circumstances