Nigel Brothers fined £15,000 and hit with £30,000 costs over client cash transfers

Tribunal finds client-to-client loans, inter-ledger transfers and a £1,594.77 shortage

Solicitor Nigel Christopher Brothers has been fined £15,000 and ordered to pay £30,000 in costs after the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found he breached multiple accounting rules over several years while a partner at NC Brothers & Co.

Sitting virtually on 5 December 2022, the Tribunal approved a Judgment on an Agreed Outcome between the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and Mr Brothers. The case centred on how client money was moved and held between November 2013 and February 2019, with the SRA alleging a series of improper transactions that risked undermining public confidence in solicitors’ handling of funds.

The Tribunal recorded that Mr Brothers caused or allowed private loans to clients using money held for other clients without obtaining prior written consent from both parties. This breached Rule 27.2 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2011 and Principle 6 of the SRA Principles 2011. It also found that, between December 2013 and May 2019, he authorised inter-ledger transfers to plug overdrawn client ledgers, contrary to Rule 1.2(c) of the 2011 Accounts Rules and Principles 6 and 10.

In addition, from November 2013 to February 2019, funds were accepted and held in client account for “Mr PD” for investment purposes, amounting to the use of the client account as a banking facility, a breach of Rule 14.5 of the 2011 Accounts Rules and Principle 6. As at 31 August 2019, the client account also showed a shortage of £1,594.77, contrary to Rule 1.2(a) of the 2011 Accounts Rules and Principles 6 and 10.

At the time of the misconduct, the Tribunal noted, Mr Brothers was not only a partner but also held senior compliance roles as Compliance Officer for Legal Practice (COLP), Compliance Officer for Finance and Administration (COFA) and Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO). The firm practised mainly in immigration and conveyancing, with some litigation, probate and matrimonial work, and ceased to operate on 15 May 2022.

The matter reached the regulator’s attention through a qualified accountant’s report for the 2017/2018 year, which flagged client-to-client transfers representing private loans—a practice that amounts to a breach of Rule 27 unless there is express, prior written authority from both clients. Following the SRA’s investigation and the parties’ negotiations, an Agreed Outcome was presented shortly before the listed hearing.

In assessing culpability and harm, the Tribunal said Mr Brothers was wholly responsible for what occurred and that the paperwork showed he felt entitled to deal with client money in this way. The panel stressed that the conduct fell into the “more serious” Indicative Fine Band, warranting a fine at the top of that band. The SDT also accepted that no client ultimately lost money, but concluded that the risk and the impact on public confidence were significant.

Alongside the £15,000 fine—forfeit to the Crown—and £30,000 in agreed costs, the SDT imposed practice restrictions. Mr Brothers may not practise as a sole practitioner, sole manager or sole owner; may not be a partner or member of an LLP, LDP or ABS; may not act as COLP or COFA; and may not hold client money or be a signatory on any client account, save to deal with funds held on the client account of his former practice. The Tribunal described these conditions as necessary and appropriate safeguards for the public and said they were a key element in its approval of the Agreed Outcome.

The Order was dated 13 January 2023, with Tribunal chair R Nicholas confirming the sanctions and restrictions. The decision closes a regulatory chapter in which the SDT emphasised the absolute prohibition on using client accounts as banking facilities, the need for proper written authorities, and the central role of accurate, compliant accounting in protecting clients and upholding trust in the profession.