Choudri Jamal Uzzaman

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

The Respondent, supervisor of an IVA, refused to admit a creditor's debt of £44,796.11, failed to reply to correspondence, sent a misleading letter, and was connected to a forged letter (back-dated and adopting a reference that only appeared a month later). The Tribunal found allegations 1, 3, 4 and 5 substantiated. On allegation 2 (forgery), the Tribunal was not sure the Respondent authored the signature but was sure he played a significant role in the letter being sent. The Respondent did not appear and indicated he did not contest the action. He was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay costs of £4,026.70.

Duties found breached:

• No taking unfair advantage
• No conflict between current clients
• Report serious misconduct of others

Aggravating factors:

• Allegations were extremely serious / serious conduct unbefitting a solicitor
• Played a significant role in a forged letter being sent
• As supervisor of the IVA he was personally involved

Mitigating factors:

• Respondent was unwell and of advanced years
• Respondent did not contest the action and effectively admitted the allegations