An experienced solicitor who verified her clients’ signatures on a form for taking their children out the country has been struck off.
Wendy Randall admitted signing two affidavits to confirm that her clients had given signed consent for their children to travel to South Africa.
Randall’s clients had been a couple who were then married, where the husband was a South African businessman. The couple’s personal assistant was also Randall’s daughter.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard that in August 2016, Randall signed two parental consent affadavits to confirm these documents had been signed and sworn before her by both the husband and wife. The solicitor of 31 years accepted that she signed these papers without either client being present.
Randall recalled that her daughter had asked her to help finalise the husband and wife’s travel arrangements and presented her with the completed and signed declarations and original documents which Randall certified.
Randall, formerly with Cheshire firm Hillyer McKeown LLP, said she had no reason at the time to believe that the wife had not signed the declaration and genuinely believed that she was assisting her clients to be able to take a trip.
She admitted this was an error of judgment and a ‘moment of madness’ done with the best of intentions and with the knowledge that her daughter had a close working relationship with the couple as their PA.
The matter only came to light in 2020 after the clients had divorced and the wife found the documents which had been forged by the husband. This had taken place without the wife’s consent.
The wife further alleged that these documents had been produced by her husband and Randall’s daughter as they had started a relationship at the time.
Randall initially told SRA investigators she believed there were ‘personal reasons’ why the complaint had been submitted – namely her daughter’s relationship with the husband. The wife had even called Randall’s firm posing as a potential new client to confront Randall about her daughter.
Randall had also admitted in her interview with the firm that her motives, while primarily focused on helping the clients, may have included securing more work for the business.
In her mitigation, she accepted she would have to live the rest of her life with the stigma of being a ‘disgraced solicitor’ and this would be her career legacy.
She was truly sorry for her actions and accepted that her admitted dishonesty would result in her being struck off. She agreed to the outcome and to paying £6,810 costs.