§ discipline
‹ Browse decisions

Janet Mary McKay MacMillan

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number8954/2003
Date01/01/2003
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Client Money, Failures, Solicitors' Accounts Rules

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

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 8,078
Dishonesty foundNo

Janet Mary McKay MacMillan, a sole practitioner admitted in 1983, faced 11 substantiated allegations of conduct unbefitting a solicitor, including persistent failures to respond to the OSS, clients and third parties, failures to progress client matters, failures to lodge bills of costs, and breaches of the Solicitors Accounts Rules (overdrawn client accounts, no reconciliations, and failure to file an Accountant's Report). The picture was chaotic, with clients suffering losses, notably a single parent (Mrs N) who could not recover £1,000 plus £1,000 compensation. The Respondent had previously been fined £750 in 2003 for a similar failure. She did not attend and requested to be struck off. The Tribunal found all allegations substantiated, made no express finding of dishonesty, and struck her off the Roll, ordered costs of £8,078.11, and made an Enforcement Order for the £1,000 compensation direction.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Previous appearance before the Tribunal in April 2003 for a similar allegation of failing to reply to OSS correspondence
  • Members of the public suffered significant losses and prejudice
  • Respondent represented a real risk to the public
  • Chaotic accounts and failure to file Accountant's Report which remained outstanding
  • Numerous and serious complaints from multiple clients and firms

Mitigating factors:

  • Serious ill-health and subsequent death of the Respondent's father in October 2002
  • Firm's financial/cash flow constraints
  • Respondent herself requested to be struck off and accepted her standard had fallen

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/8954/