J Entwisle & Another

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

Two partners of Bartlett and Son (Chester) faced disciplinary proceedings arising from mishandled personal injury claims and accounts breaches. Ms Janette Entwisle, a salaried partner, was found to have acted dishonestly (applying Twinsectra v Yardley) by devising a scheme of paying firm costs into client account to conceal her negligence and secretly settle clients' claims, and by misleading clients and the Law Society; she was struck off the Roll. The First Respondent (name redacted), an equity partner and complaints partner, admitted Solicitors Accounts Rules breaches (absolute liability), making materially false and misleading statements to the Law Society, failing to handle complaints and to address conflicts; however the Tribunal found the dishonesty allegation against him NOT proved. He was fined £28,000. Costs were apportioned 80% to the First Respondent and 20% to Ms Entwisle.

Duties found breached:

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

Aggravating factors:

• Ms Entwisle devised and operated a dishonest scheme paying firm costs into client account to conceal negligence and fund settlements
• Ms Entwisle instructed junior staff to write untrue letters to clients and was not frank with clients, the Law Society or counsel
• First Respondent was a senior solicitor and designated complaints partner who abdicated his responsibilities
• First Respondent's admitted false and misleading statements to the Law Society were at the serious end of the scale

Mitigating factors:

• Ms Entwisle was under extreme pressure, heavy workload and lacked support and adequate supervision at an early stage of her career
• First Respondent had an unblemished 39-year career and excellent references attesting to his integrity
• First Respondent admitted his shortcomings and was found not to have been dishonest
• Respondents largely admitted the allegations (in amended form)