A senior solicitor has been struck off after recording impossible hours to maximise her bonus
A senior solicitor who recorded an average of more than 28 hours of work a day over a twelve-month period in an attempt to maximise her bonus has been struck off the roll, following findings of dishonesty by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.
Samina Ahmed, aged 46, qualified as a solicitor in 2005 and worked for seventeen years as a prison law solicitor at criminal defence firm Tuckers until September 2022. She held a senior position at the firm and supervised trainee solicitors.
The tribunal heard that Ms Ahmed’s conduct led to Tuckers having to repay nearly £100,000 to the Legal Aid Agency after misleading time entries were used to bill for prison law work.
In the year ending 30 June 2022, Ms Ahmed recorded 7,511.70 hours of work over 266 days. This amounted to an average of 28.24 hours per day and included 133 days on which she claimed to have worked more than 24 hours. The tribunal described this level of billing as impossible.
The SDT said Ms Ahmed continued to record inflated hours even after she was warned about her conduct during a meeting on 7 April 2022. By doing so, the tribunal found, she misled her employer.
Those time entries were submitted to the Legal Aid Agency and were sufficiently high to exceed the fixed fee structure under the prison law contract. This allowed the firm to recover payment based on claimed time spent, increasing the cost to the public purse.
Embed from Getty Images
As a result of what the tribunal described as systemic billing abuse, the Legal Aid Agency overpaid Tuckers £98,093, which the firm was required to repay.
Ms Ahmed admitted the allegations. The tribunal accepted that her actions were motivated by the firm’s bonus scheme, which rewarded high levels of billing. It found that she aimed to reach the highest bonus tier, equivalent to 400 per cent of salary, which could have earned her £69,300. No bonus was paid because the misconduct was discovered before any payment was made.
In its findings, the tribunal said Ms Ahmed’s conduct fell far below the standards expected of a solicitor. It concluded that she acted dishonestly, failed to act with integrity, undermined public trust and confidence in the profession, and misled both the Legal Aid Agency and her firm.
The SDT determined that the seriousness of the misconduct was at the highest level and that striking Ms Ahmed off the roll was the only appropriate sanction.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority applied for costs of almost £50,000. However, taking into account of Ms Ahmed’s limited means, the tribunal ordered her to pay £5,000.