Alan David Susskind and Cameron Stuart Fyfe

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

The Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal found both partners of the former firm Ross Harper guilty of professional misconduct for operating/acquiescing in a policy known as 'the drawer', whereby SLAB funds received to pay third-party outlays were retained in the firm account to improve cash flow, with ledger entries created and reversed to disguise unissued cheques, resulting in wrongful use of clients' funds and delayed payments to third parties, all in breach of the Accounts Rules and conduct rules. Both also submitted inaccurate accounts certificates to the Law Society. Although no dishonesty was averred or found, the Tribunal regarded the conduct as a continuing course of deceitful conduct and struck both Respondents off the Roll. The First Respondent was found not guilty of a separate charge concerning notarising a false divorce affidavit (remitted to the Law Society under s.53ZA). The Respondents were found jointly and severally liable for expenses (to be taxed). Publicity was deferred pending related proceedings against four former partners.

Duties found breached:

• Not mislead third parties or opponents
• Non-discriminatory acceptance and cab-rank
• No improper use of client money
• Good faith and courtesy to colleagues
• Comply with rules of foreign jurisdictions

Aggravating factors:

• Continuing course of deceitful conduct over a lengthy period regarding the firm's cashroom practices
• Wrongful use of client funds (SLAB monies) to benefit the firm's cash flow and overdraft
• Third parties denied timeous payment or payment at all for services requested
• Submission of inaccurate accounts certificates that obscured the true financial position from the Law Society
• Failure to bring the wrongful conduct to the Law Society's attention - left to a cashroom staff member to whistle-blow
• Contributed to the downfall of one of Scotland's foremost legal firms; Guarantee Fund claims estimated at around £400,000

Mitigating factors:

• Neither Respondent instigated the 'drawer' practice, which had been in operation for many years
• No dishonesty averred or admitted; no immediate personal financial gain
• Long unblemished careers of almost 30 years each
• Strong character references from eminent members of the profession
• Significant personal and financial consequences suffered (sequestration/voluntary sequestration, loss of capital accounts)
• Second Respondent's extensive pro bono and pioneering public interest work; made attempts to chase up payments
• First Respondent inherited a system that had spiralled and lacked appropriate cashroom support

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["review_dishonesty_finding_cue_present"]