J Entwisle & Another

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

In SDT case 8751-2003, two partners of Bartlett and Son were before the Tribunal. The Second Respondent, Janette Entwisle, admitted Solicitors Accounts Rules breaches and conduct unbefitting (mishandling personal injury claims, conflicts of interest, inadequate complaints handling) but denied dishonesty, claiming she acted on the First Respondent's instructions. The Tribunal disbelieved her, found she had devised a scheme to pay off negligence-affected clients using the firm's money routed through client account and had deceived clients and the firm, and made an express finding of dishonesty under the Twinsectra test; she was struck off. The First Respondent (name redacted) faced an allegation of dishonesty in making materially false and misleading statements to the Law Society; the Tribunal, as a preliminary matter, found the dishonesty allegation not proved to the criminal standard, treating his errors as careless/reckless rather than dishonest. He admitted amended allegations including compromising his integrity by making materially false and misleading statements and failing in his duties as complaints/equity partner, and was fined £28,000. On costs, the First Respondent was ordered to pay 80% and the Second Respondent 20% of the main costs (subject to detailed assessment, total estimated around £300,000), with the First Respondent also paying costs of his unsuccessful severance application of 24 January 2006; each party bore its own costs of the other interim hearings.

Duties found breached:

• No taking unfair advantage
• Not mislead third parties or opponents
• Act in the client's best interests
• Keep client informed and respond promptly
• Complaints procedure and handling
• No conflict between current clients
• No improper use of client money

Aggravating factors:

• Dishonest use of the firm's money and deception of clients
• Devising a scheme to pay clients by routing firm costs cheques through client account to circumvent financial controls
• Instructing junior members of staff to write untrue letters to clients
• Conduct at the serious end of the scale; First Respondent abdicated responsibilities as equity and complaints partner

Mitigating factors:

• Ms Entwisle was under extreme pressure, heavy workload and lack of support from the senior/equity partner
• Relatively inexperienced solicitor given excessive responsibility at an early stage
• No longer practising as a solicitor at the time of the hearing; expressed regret
• First Respondent had 39 years' unblemished career, strong references and was found honest by witnesses