A solicitor was fined for inaccurately declaring a £1m loan.
- The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal criticised her lack of scrutiny.
- The declaration enabled the release of government funds to a client.
- Mistakenly, the solicitor believed funds were already held in client account.
- The tribunal imposed financial penalties and practising restrictions.
In a recent decision, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a £15,000 fine on solicitor Asiya Nasim Kaleem for signing a declaration that inaccurately stated her firm held £1m in a client account. This declaration led to the unwarranted release of a £1m Covid-19 Future Fund loan to a client. The tribunal noted a significant breach of integrity, highlighting Kaleem’s failure to adequately scrutinise assurance from a non-lawyer supervisor regarding the legitimacy of signing the declaration.
The Future Fund was a governmental initiative aimed at supporting companies facing financial difficulties during the Covid-19 pandemic. To qualify, companies needed to secure matched funding from third-party investors, with the obligation that these funds were transferred to a solicitor’s client account before the loan could be processed. Ms Kaleem’s law firm, Alison Law Solicitors, came under scrutiny when it was revealed that investor funds had not been received prior to the declaration being signed.
Ms Kaleem, who became qualified in 2016, served as the head of litigation and the compliance officer at the Sheffield firm. She argued that the error was genuine, explaining that she believed the required funds were deposited in 2017. She consulted with her non-lawyer supervisor, who reassured her that she could proceed with the signing. However, the SDT determined that the wording in the declaration explicitly required confirmation of funds in the firm’s account, which Ms Kaleem should have challenged.
The tribunal emphasised the importance of solicitors applying rigorous scrutiny, particularly when entrusted with declarations implicating public funds. Despite accepting her explanation and acknowledging her actions were neither dishonest nor reckless, the SDT concluded that her acceptance of her supervisor’s explanation demonstrated a lack of integrity. The failure to perform necessary checks before signing the declaration was seen as undermining trust in the legal profession.
In addition to the £15,000 fine, Ms Kaleem faced restrictions on her practising certificate. These restrictions prevent her from working as a sole practitioner, freelance solicitor, or in a role that involves managing client funds. Furthermore, she cannot be a partner, compliance officer, or signatory on a client account for a period of two years. She was also ordered to pay £25,000 in costs, reflecting the seriousness of the breach and reinforcing the importance of maintaining professional standards.
The tribunal’s decision underscores the critical need for meticulous verification in legal proceedings, especially when significant public funds are involved.
