Christopher Michael Haddock

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

Mr Haddock, a partner, COLP and COFA, accepted a £25,000 loan from his client Mr Bell, paid it into the firm's client account, and later drew up a backdated fictitious agreement portraying the loan as a fixed fee for legal services, at a time when the firm was under SRA investigation. The Tribunal found all allegations proved including dishonesty in relation to allegations 1.2 and 1.3. It found he acted with an own-interest conflict, used the client account as a banking facility, and created a false document. No exceptional circumstances existed to depart from the usual strike-off sanction for dishonesty. He was struck off the Roll. No costs order was made solely on account of his means (though costs of £28,827 would have been ordered had he the means).

Duties found breached:

• Proper basis for allegations
• Integrity
• Uphold public trust in the profession
• No conflict between current clients
• No improper use of client money

Aggravating factors:

• Dishonesty
• Misconduct was deliberate and calculated
• Blamed Mr and Mrs Bell by accusing them of fabricating accounts and implied blame on Ms Grainger
• Knew he was in material breach of professional obligations
• Motivation was personal financial gain to keep the Firm afloat and avoid SRA scrutiny
• Breach of trust placed in him by client
• SRA was misled by the fake agreement