Nazneen Raza Suleman

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

The Respondent, a solicitor admitted in 1999, was found to have dishonestly claimed a telephone extension of time had been granted in Landlord and Tenant proceedings when no such conversation took place, created a false attendance note, and created or caused to be created a forged letter (the 'Second Letter' of 27 March 2006) purporting to come from the landlord's solicitors, which she then used in County Court proceedings knowing it was not genuine. The Tribunal preferred the evidence of Mr Shah and rejected the Respondent's attempt to blame her former principal. All three allegations were proved beyond reasonable doubt with express findings of dishonesty under the Twinsectra test. She was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay costs of £11,154.71 (not to be enforced without leave). Her subsequent High Court appeal was withdrawn.

Duties found breached:

• Not mislead the court
• No baseless or threatened misconduct report

Aggravating factors:

• Creation of a false telephone attendance note
• Creation of a forged letter
• Use of the forged letter in County Court proceedings
• Attempt to blame former principal Ms Desai for the forgery

Mitigating factors:

• Relative inexperience/youth at the time
• No financial gain made by the Respondent
• One-off matter
• Difficult financial circumstances as a single parent with two children