Mumba Chakulya

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

The SRA alleged that the Respondent, a junior solicitor at Goody Burrett LLP, provided false information to Clients A and B (and colleague David Cammack) about work undertaken on debt recovery matters, including falsely claiming proceedings had been issued, default judgment requested, and enforcement actions taken. Allegations 1.1 and 1.2 (Client A) were found not proved: the Tribunal accepted the Respondent was a credible witness, that she genuinely believed she had issued proceedings (possibly using a personal Gmail account that could not be conclusively checked due to court's 3-year search limit), and that the Firm provided poor supervision and a chaotic environment. The Tribunal expressly found she had not acted dishonestly. Allegation 1.3 (Client B) was dismissed following a successful no-case-to-answer submission, as key witness David Cammack was found unsatisfactory, flippant, inconsistent and his evidence too weak to support a finding. No sanction or costs ordered.