An incident involving a paralegal at Chattertons has attracted regulatory action from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).
- Mabel Pamela Clarke, a paralegal, misled a client concerning a Land Registry application she inherited, prompting a formal rebuke.
- The issue stemmed from an incomplete application by the firm, which resulted in significant client confusion over the land purchase.
- Ms Clarke’s misleading email was not for personal gain, and she acknowledged her actions when addressed by her firm.
- The SRA deemed it necessary to impose a public rebuke to maintain public trust, alongside a cost order of £300.
An incident involving a paralegal at the Lincolnshire firm Chattertons has led to regulatory action by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). Mabel Pamela Clarke was found to have misled a client about the status of their Land Registry application, a file she had inherited with existing complications. Ms Clarke’s role in the matter began when she reviewed an application related to a client’s land purchase that had been mishandled by the firm in 2020. The original purchase, finalised on 15 June 2020, lacked proper identification of restrictions preventing the client from utilising the land as planned.
In response to these oversights, the matter escalated to a formal negligence complaint, initiating a claim referred to the firm’s insurers. The insurers advised seeking an informal resolution, proposing a £10,000 payment from the neighbour involved in the land purchase. However, issues persisted as the firm’s application to HM Land Registry (HMLR) was rejected due to a failure to comply with a requisition. No subsequent action was taken until Ms Clarke resumed work on the case in August 2023.
Upon reviewing the case, Ms Clarke identified a £502 balance owed to the client and resubmitted the necessary HMLR application. Immediately afterwards, she emailed the client indicating that the application was pending, ostensibly misleading the client that the matter had been progressing for some time. The SRA identified this communication as inaccurate and contrary to the file’s actual status regarding the HMLR application.
The firm, upon discovering the discrepancy, concluded Ms Clarke’s behaviour amounted to a lack of integrity, resulting in her dismissal for gross misconduct. Although her misleading statement was not for personal benefit, it nonetheless warranted regulatory scrutiny. Ms Clarke admitted her actions and demonstrated understanding upon being confronted, mitigating factors considered by the SRA in their decision.
Assessing the broader context, the SRA noted that Ms Clarke’s actions resulted in no tangible client loss or harm, and the risk of repetition was assessed as low. Nevertheless, the necessity for a public rebuke was determined to uphold confidence in the legal system, with Ms Clarke also assigned a cost order totalling £300.
The rebuke of Mabel Pamela Clarke serves as a reminder of the importance of integrity and accurate communication within legal practice.
