British solicitor fined for allowing attorneys to sell client's property
Andrew John Chatterton had acted for a client living in a care home as well as her two beneficiaries who used her money to buy properties while she was still alive
A veteran retired British solicitor who failed to recognise the problems with attorneys plundering his vulnerable client’s funds has been fined £20,000.
Andrew John Chatterton had acted for a client living in a care home as well as her two beneficiaries who used her money to buy properties while she was still alive.
In total, the elderly client suffered a financial loss of £385,000 and Chatterton admitted as part of an agreed outcome with the Solicitors Regulation Authority that he caused or allowed this to happen.
Chatterton, admitted in 1981, had been a partner with Foys Solicitors in Doncaster when he was instructed by two clients who were acting for the elderly client under a lasting power of attorney.
In 2015 and 2016, these two clients had instructed Chatterton to use the woman’s funds to purchase five properties between them from the sale of her London property. He was told the proceeds of the sale would create rental income to pay for care home fees.
Chatterton made no checks with the woman as to her wishes and the sale went ahead, with the attorneys either splitting the proceeds or becoming jointly registered with the woman on the purchased properties. The Office of the Public Guardian then received an anonymous note saying the attorneys were living beyond their means: the OPG investigated and issued Court of Protection proceedings.
They were removed from their attorneyships and different lawyers appointed. The woman died in 2020 and the two former attorneys were the beneficiaries under her will.
Chatterton admitted that the transactions he helped to facilitate showed a ‘pattern of inadequate practice’ and that a solicitor with his level of experience ought to have notified the woman how her interests were being affected.
He submitted that he genuinely believed the attorneys were trying to do their best for the woman and they had explained these transactions would allow them to ensure her care home fees were paid. Chatterton claimed to have been deceived by the client but now accepted he was insufficiently suspicious or vigilant to the risk of abuse of position by the attorneys. There was no evidence that care home fees were not paid or that the woman suffered any actual detriment.
Chatterton, who has now retired from the profession, agreed to pay a £20,000 fine and costs of almost £4,500.
