Adrian Gerard Donkin

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

Sole practitioner Adrian Gerard Donkin admitted misappropriating client funds and numerous accounts/practice rule breaches but denied dishonesty. He took 'loans' from two deceased estates (Mrs W and Mr B) and a living client (Miss B) to fund his firm's VAT and office expenses. The Tribunal found he was dishonest as to Mrs W and Mr B (he had no honest belief in his claimed authority and did not inform beneficiaries), but not dishonest regarding Miss B, who had consented (though he failed to ensure independent advice). All nine allegations were found substantiated. Given the dishonesty finding, the Tribunal ordered him struck off the Roll and to pay £13,500 costs.

Duties found breached:

• Fair dealing with unrepresented parties
• No own-interest conflict
• No conflict between current clients
• Handle inadvertently received material
• No improper use of client money
• Prompt accounting and return of money
• Supervise staff and delegated work

Aggravating factors:

• Took client/estate money to pay own VAT and office outgoings without informing beneficiaries
• Failed to inform co-executor and parents/guardians of minor beneficiaries
• Reliance on a 10-year-old letter addressed to his father as purported authority
• Letter of authority from Mr B signed shortly before evidence of his severe dementia
• One beneficiary reached 21 with no funds available to pay him
• Previous disciplinary finding in 1997 (failure to respond to Complaints Bureau)
• Increased interest to a commercial rate advantageous to himself

Mitigating factors:

• No intention permanently to deprive; loans repaid with interest
• Loans openly and transparently recorded in the firm's books
• Volunteered information about borrowings to the FIO
• Severe financial and professional difficulties caused largely by former partner's misconduct
• Exceptional character evidence - 108 supportive testimonials
• No loss to any client or beneficiary; no client complaints
• De facto suspension of ~20 months since original strike-off; personal circumstances including impending bankruptcy and marriage breakdown
• Paid around £200,000 from his own resources to meet debts incurred by others