Skip to main content
discipline 3 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Robert John Metcalfe

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number11954/2019
Date01/01/2019
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 30,574
Dishonesty foundYes

Robert Metcalfe, a sole practitioner at RMJ Solicitors, faced 10 allegations arising from an SRA investigation into dubious investment schemes, loans and share transactions processed through his firm between 2014 and 2017. The Tribunal found allegations 1.1 (acting in transactions bearing hallmarks of early release pension scams) and 1.3 (facilitating dubious PSL share transactions through client account) proved with express findings of dishonesty, holding that he had turned a blind eye and asked no questions lest he learn something he would rather not know, subordinating clients' interests to his own financial gain. Allegations 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 (in part), 1.9 and 1.10 were also proved (client account used as banking facility, accounting record failures, outsourcing client care signatures to the ultimate beneficiary, false CQS accreditation claims, and COLP/COFA compliance failures). Allegations 1.2, 1.7 and 1.8 were dismissed. Given the dishonesty and absence of exceptional circumstances, the Tribunal struck him off the Roll and ordered costs of £30,573.50. His subsequent appeal was dismissed by Murray J in August 2021.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Proven dishonesty in material breach of obligations
  • Deliberate, calculated and repeated misconduct over a period of time
  • Turned a blind eye to clear and obvious hallmarks of fraud across separate transaction types
  • Motivated by financial gain
  • Evasive in interview and in written answers during investigation

Mitigating factors:

  • Previously unblemished career
  • Some, albeit limited, admissions from the outset
  • No client complaints in matters found proved
  • Did not mislead the regulator or conceal conduct; cooperated with investigation
  • Firm crisis following departure of key fee earners; personal stress/health impact

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/11954/