'Cavalier' solicitor 'poses risk to public' over client account mishandling

A solicitor who mishandled client money with an ‘inept and ill-advised approach’ has been given an indefinite restriction order meaning he cannot practice autonomously or handle client money.

Iftikhar Aziz, a registered foreign lawyer admitted to the roll in October 2008, represented himself at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, where the panel found ‘inconsistencies’ in Aziz’s evidence which ‘could not be reconciled’.

The two-day tribunal heard Aziz’s misconduct was related to non-compliance with the solicitors accounts rules and breaches of principles in relation to mishandling client money.

Barclays, where Aziz’s firm UK & Co Solicitors Limited had its accounts, notified Aziz that it would be closing the firm’s client and office bank account. Aziz did not open a new bank account until after the closure. To pay clients he ‘swapped’ the money in the client account for cash in the firm’s safe, which was subsequently paid to clients who had to accept being paid in cash.

Clients ‘did not appear to have been affected’ beyond inconvenience caused by collecting their money in cash from the firm ‘and the associated risk to them in so doing given the amounts involved’. There had been no misappropriation of client money.

The tribunal said it was ‘concerned with the inconsistencies in the answers given by Mr Aziz’ in his interviews, correspondence, witness statements and skeleton argument. It added: ‘Those inconsistencies could not be reconciled with each other. Nor could they be reconciled with the oral evidence Mr Aziz provided at the substantive hearing.’

In a written judgment, the tribunal found Aziz ‘was motivated’ by ‘his mistaken belief that he was acting in the best interests of the clients given the circumstances’ as well as ‘the most convenient solution for the firm.’

It added: ‘His misconduct was not spontaneous, it was ill-conceived but conscious decisions were made to behave in the manner that he did.’

The consequence of Aziz’s misconduct was ‘profound given the cavalier approach taken by Mr Aziz in his handling of client monies,’ the tribunal found.

Aggravating features included that Aziz lacked insight as he tried to blame others, his actions were deliberate, calculated, and repeated over a significant period of time and he ought to have known that his conduct ‘amounted to material breaches of the accounts rules’.

Explaining the sanctions imposed, the tribunal said: ‘Given the fundamental failings of Mr Aziz in respect of which no insight was shown by him, the tribunal considered that he continued to pose a risk to the public.’

Aziz may not practice autonomously, hold managerial roles within a firm, be a partner in a firm, or handle client money. The restriction order is of an indefinite duration.

Benjamin Tankel, for the SRA, applied for £73,047 in costs which included £31,678 for the forensic investigation and £41,400 for Capsticks fees.

Though the tribunal found the time spent by the FIO and Capsticks was reasonable and proportionate ‘given its findings in relation to the state of disarray in record keeping at the firm’, it ordered costs of £25,000 after considering Aziz’s financial position.