Solicitor fined £32,000 for secretly working against firm's own client

An experienced solicitor who did not tell his firm he was working with the other side in a contentious property deal has been fined £32,000. 

John Charles Wright was a manager with south east London practice Ashley Wilson LLP when he had ‘direct involvement’ in the transaction and even a potential claim against clients of his own firm.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard that Wright, admitted as a solicitor in 1991, had a ‘close personal relationship’ with the buyers looking to exchange on a property valued at £1.835m.

Colleagues at Ashley Wilson had known that Wright and the purchasers were friends, and it was agreed that the firm should not act for both sides due to a potential conflict of interest.

The purchasers then instructed another firm to handle the conveyancing, with Wright supposedly no longer involved, as far as his firm was aware.

In fact, he continued to provide instructions to the new firm of solicitors in relation to the transaction. After contracts were exchanged in April 2016, this firm sent Ashley Wilson a letter days before completion stating that the selling agent had mis-described the property and claiming that the purchasers were paying over the odds.

Wright was then involved in the preparation of a pre-action protocol letter to his own firm alleging a misrepresentation of the property and seeking damages. He instructed the new firm to threaten legal action against Ashley Wilson if it did not permit access to the property and was ‘instrumental’ in instructing another solicitor to provide advice on a potential claim.

Wright communicated to this solicitor that the letter alleging mis-description ‘needs to be more aggressive’, then later said his preferred course of action was to ‘go hard’ with a claim for damages against the sellers. The sale was eventually completed and the possibility of litigation fell away.

Wright was reported to the SRA after he left Ashley Wilson in February 2020 and colleagues found a file in the office showing he was in direct conflict with the firm’s client.

He admitted misconduct and accepted his conduct fell below the high standards of a solicitor in practice. In mitigation not endorsed by the SRA, he said it was ‘regrettable’ that the firm had decided to act for the sellers knowing of his close relationship with the buyers. The tribunal acknowledged his unblemished record but said his conduct had caused distress and extra costs to the vendors, and was in direct contradiction to the agreement that Wright would not act for the buyers.

He agreed with the SRA to be fined £32,000 and to pay £15,600 costs.