Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

T J S Hardacre & Another

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number9486/2006
Date01/01/2006
OutcomeNo Order, Suspend - Indefinite

Allegation / charges

Client Money, Failures, Solicitors' Accounts Rules, Others

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

SanctionSuspension
CostsGBP 14,352
Dishonesty foundNo

Timothy John Simpson Hardacre, a solicitor and sole principal of Hillyard Simpson Hardacre and Fuller Thomas, was found guilty of conduct unbefitting a solicitor in relation to accounting failures, misuse of a suspense account, failure to file Accountant's Reports, failure to produce books of account, inadequate supervision of an unadmitted immigration caseworker, and failure to bill/account for client monies (notably in the matter of Mr M). No dishonesty was alleged or found - the conduct was characterised as muddle and incompetence, compounded by a serious irreversible psychiatric illness. Given the need to protect the public, the Tribunal suspended him from practice for an indefinite period and ordered him to pay costs of £14,352.11. The application for a Section 43 order against the Second Respondent (clerk) was refused, as the supervision failure was the solicitor's responsibility and the clerk's current arrangements had been approved; no costs order was made against him.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Serious nature of the substantiated matters
  • Not frank with the Investigation Officer - put him off by claiming records were held elsewhere
  • Sole principal of two practices and frequently abroad, unable to provide effective supervision

Mitigating factors:

  • No dishonesty alleged or found
  • Serious and irreversible psychiatric illness explaining poor performance
  • Frank apology and acceptance of blame in his statement
  • Genuine misunderstanding of the Rules (e.g. fixed fees)
  • Significant delay in proceedings
  • Character references submitted
  • No sham arrangement; no lack of client care

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/9486/