S Gupta & Others

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

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the Second Respondent, Sujata Gupta, a partner/equity member of Davis & Co (later Davis Solicitors LLP), had dishonestly backdated ten letters to defeat a client complaint, dishonestly overcharged the estate of EH deceased (billing almost exactly half of a £60,568 investment receipt), dishonestly failed to account to clients and beneficiaries, and breached Rule 22 SAR. Dishonesty was expressly found under the Twinsectra test on several counts. She was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay costs of £65,000 (not to be enforced without leave, with a means hearing to follow). The First Respondent, who acted as a 'whistle blower' and made good the client account shortfall, faced only a strict-liability Rule 22 breach and received no order and no costs; the Third Respondent (the LLP) faced no findings and no order.

Duties found breached:

• No taking unfair advantage
• No conflict between current clients
• Handle inadvertently received material
• No improper use of client money

Aggravating factors:

• Backdated letters deliberately created to defeat a client's complaint
• Overcharging billed for almost exactly half of a £60,000 investment received, with personal payments of £35,000 taken shortly after
• Withheld over £30,000 due to a charitable residuary beneficiary for nearly a year
• Failed to provide estate accounts despite repeated requests
• Circumstances suggesting client AR may have been vulnerable

Mitigating factors:

• No previous disciplinary matters
• Second Respondent's medical/health difficulties
• Loss of approximately £90,000 invested in the firm and exclusion from it