A LAWYER who took advantage of an elderly client to escape his own financial difficulties has been suspended for two years by the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal.
Mr Ian Leitch, 46, admitted professional misconduct and the tribunal described his behaviour as reprehensible and inexcusable.
Mr Leitch has been a solicitor since 1975 and, for the last six years, had practised on his own under the name of Gibson Kerr and Co, at India Street, Edinburgh.
The 85-year-old client, a retired schoolteacher, was approached by Mr Leitch in 1993 when he needed a short-term bridging loan because he was having difficulty in selling his house and was committed to buying a new home.
The tribunal stated that the client kept substantial cash balances and gave Mr Leitch #100,000. It was to be a short-term loan but it was not until the client consulted other solicitors and after constant reminders that Mr Leitch repaid the cash with interest 18 months later.
The tribunal stated that borrowing money from a client who was not in the business of lending money and without the client being independently advised was a breach of the Solicitors (Scotland) Accounts Rules.
It had been informed that, when Mr Leitch obtained the loan, he had not anticipated the delay in finding a buyer for his former house.
``The tribunal takes a very serious view of Mr Leitch's whole conduct in this matter in that he took advantage of an elderly client to extricate himself from a financial difficulty of his own making.
``His actings were wholly reprehensible and inexcusable and the public has a right to know that the profession finds the conduct adopted by Mr Leitch wholly unbecoming that of a solicitor.''
In a second case, Mr Michael Kilkerr, 39, of Lewis Street, Stranraer, had his practising certificate restricted so that he can act only as a qualified assistant for the next five years.
Mr Kilkerr admitted professional misconduct over the sale of a hotel in Ayrshire in 1990. At the time, he was a partner in the firm of McCormick and Nicholson, Symons and Macdonald, of Victoria Street, Newton Stewart.
The firm had bought the hotel and was selling it to clients known personally to Mr Kilkerr. He did not tell the clients, a couple, that they should seek independent advice.
The tribunal also heard that, in 1992, the actings of another partner in the firm, Giles Davies, had resulted in the insolvency of the firm and all the partners.
The tribunal said Mr Kilkerr was guilty of professional misconduct in that he acted in a conflict of interest situation, but acknowledged that he had already suffered gravely as a result of the reckless conduct of Davies, who last year was jailed for seven years for embezzling #2.5m of clients' money.
Although the disposal of the hotel was a matter for all the partners of his firm it was Mr Kilkerr's relationship with the couple which gave rise to the conflict and he had ample time to advise them to be separately represented.
``A case such as this, where a solicitor has permitted his personal interests and the interests of his firm to prevail over the interests of a client, raises a serious question regarding the integrity of the solicitor concerned and serious consideration has been given to whether Mr Kilkerr should be suspended or have his name removed from the roll (of practising solicitors).''
Taking account of Mr Kilkerr's previously unblemished record, the tribunal had ``marginally drawn short'' of making such an order.
In a third case, Ronald Thomson, 49, who used to practise under the name Sinclair Thomson, in Holmlea Road, Glasgow, was struck off. The tribunal said he had embezzled #70,022 of clients' money.
The tribunal stated that no trace could be found of Mr Thomson at his most recent business adddress in Holmlea Road or at his most recent personal address at Strathyre Street, Shawlands, Glasgow.
Mr Thomson ceased practising as a solicitor in April 1992.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article