UK: Solicitor struck off for hiding friendship with convicted money lender
A tribunal found that Malcolm Glynn had been motivated a desire to conceal the relationship he had with a convicted money launderer and had breached his position of trust
A British solicitor who sought to conceal his friendship with a convicted money launderer has been struck off by a tribunal.
Malcolm Glynn, 55, told his firm, Cumbria Practice Progression Solicitors, that he had only met Craig LaPenna once before and he did not know who he was until he was referred to reports of his conviction for illegal money lending and money laundering offences. Glynn also told the SRA that he had no relationship at all with LaPenna when this was not true.
Glynn admitted dishonesty to a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SRA) but tried to argue he should be allowed to stay in practice, saying this was a one-off mistake which was of no financial benefit to him.
The tribunal found Glynn had been motivated by his desire to conceal the relationship he had with LaPenna and his actions were planned. He had breached the position of trust placed in him and sought to deliberately mislead the SRA.
The judgment said: ‘Mr Glynn had admitted that he had been dishonest on three separate occasions and had made at least 10 statements that he knew to be untrue. The tribunal found that his conduct had been deliberate, calculated and repeated. Whilst this had been over a relatively short period of time, the number of dishonest statements made by him was significant.’
Glynn had been admitted to the roll in 2004 and was employed by the firm for almost five years until February 2020.
In 2019 he was reported to the SRA by his client who had refinanced her business through a broker, LaPenna. The client had been called into the firm to sign documents to pay off the original loan and buy a caravan from LaPenna and believed Glynn was acting on her behalf to secure a business loan.
As far as the firm was concerned, Glynn only had a professional relationship with all the parties and there was nothing to suggest a conflict of interest. The firm wrote to the SRA saying it had acted in four matters in respect of LaPenna and explaining Glynn had been suspended because he categorically stated he met the broker only once.
The SRA stated that Glynn continued to deal with LaPenna even after his conviction, and their dealings were more than the one phone call that Glynn had previously claimed.
Glynn submitted in his mitigation he had worked incredibly hard to qualify at the age of 36 and worked at five previous firms with no SRA involvement.
But the tribunal found no exceptional circumstances in his case and ordered that he be struck off. Glynn also agreed to pay £17,000 costs.
