A solicitor who acted as a receiver in relation to the property and financial affairs of a client under a Court of Protection order has been suspended for six months by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal after admitting failing to protect the interests of her client for 16 years.
Elizabeth Forrest admitted three allegations of misconduct which took place between June 2006 and June 2022, including failing to comply with the requirements of a Court of Protection Order by not transferring the title of a property into the name of the client (Client A), and submitting annual reports to the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) with a statement of truth while knowing the contents were incomplete or innaccurate.
Client A was a minor who was bequeathed a residential property on the death of his father in 1997. The property was registered with the Land Registry under the names of two administrators.
A Court of Protection Order was subsequently made in relation to Client A on June 2006, appointing Forrest as the receiver. Prior to her appointment, an application to the Court of Protection highlighted the need to sell the property left to Client A and evict the tenant.
Shortly after her appointment as receiver, Forrest wrote to the OPG to express concern that one of the administrators may not be acting in Client A’s best interests after taking control of the house and renting it out.
The OPG responded to inform Forrest she should require the trustee to transfer the title of the property into the sole name of Client A or consider obtaining possession either for letting or sale of the property through the courts. This advice was not acted on.
In December 2011 a charge was secured on the property in the sum of £20,000, of which Forrest was not aware until 2015 following the intervention of the OPG.
In May 2015, Forrest reported a potential claim of negligence to the partner of the firm at which she worked, and finally registered a restriction on the property in July 2015.
Between February 2016 and January 2017 Forrest was on long-term sick leave. No further action was taken, other than filing OPG reports, until June 2022, when the OPG notified Forrest it would be conducting an assurance visit. The firm investigated Client A’s file ahead of the OPG visit, and in September 2022 reported Forrest to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Forrest left the firm shortly after and informed the OPG that her failure to progress the transfer of the property had resulted in the value of the property being diminished, Client A had not received the benefit from the rent paid by the tenant, and requesting to be removed as deputy.
Suspending Forrest for six months, the tribunal determined the conduct to be “very serious”, and it was “an aggravating factor that Client A was a vulnerable person who was subject to a Court of Protection order”.
Although the tribunal noted Forrest had not made any personal gain and had suffered from ill health, it determined she was culpable as she had “acted in breach of a position of trust and had direct control of the circumstances giving rise to the misconduct”.
It added: “She had been inactive and was responsible for the failure to take appropriate steps on Client A’s behalf… Despite being an experienced solicitor, [Forrest] failed to act in a way that upheld the trust and confidence the public places in the provision of legal services. She did not act with the integrity, probity and trustworthiness expected of a solicitor.”
Forrest was suspended from practice for six months and ordered to pay costs of £16,821.
