Andrew Pena struck off after dishonest client fund transfers, fake invoices and secret loan deal
Andrew Roman Pena has been struck off the roll of solicitors after the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found he had dishonestly created fake invoices, raided client accounts of more than £265,000, and taken a secret £100,000 loan without safeguards.
The ruling followed a paper hearing in February 2021, where Pena admitted all allegations brought by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). The panel described his misconduct as “of the utmost seriousness” and said only permanent removal from the profession could protect the public and maintain confidence in solicitors.
Pena, admitted in 1992, was a director and major shareholder of Cubism Limited, a firm authorised in 2005. For years he oversaw its expansion, including new offices in 2015 and the recruitment of a major commercial litigation team in 2017. But the growth left the firm financially strained, heavily reliant on ongoing conditional fee litigation and, by his own account, “probably under-funded in terms of capital”.
As the financial pressures mounted, the tribunal heard, Pena began to move client money into the firm’s office account to cover expenses. Between January 2017 and March 2019, he improperly transferred at least £265,128.60 from client accounts. To disguise the withdrawals, he created invoices that falsely claimed to reflect work done and costs properly due. None of the invoices were legitimate.
Embed from Getty ImagesThe tribunal also examined a personal loan. In April 2019, Pena obtained £100,000 from a private individual, identified as Mrs C. He failed to disclose the firm’s financial troubles to her and did not ensure she received independent advice before agreeing to lend the money. This conduct, the SDT ruled, breached professional obligations to act transparently and with integrity.
In its findings, the SDT highlighted two key features: dishonesty and harm. The false invoices and client account transfers represented deliberate attempts to mislead and amounted to grave breaches of trust. The improper use of client funds, the tribunal said, exposed clients to serious risk and struck at the heart of public confidence in the profession.
Pena admitted dishonesty in relation to both the invoices and the transfers. He accepted that his actions had been designed to cover the firm’s growing costs and keep it afloat, but the tribunal concluded that no financial pressure could excuse breaches of this scale.
“The respondent committed conduct of the utmost seriousness for which he was culpable,” the judgment stated. “Given the seriousness of the admitted misconduct, the only appropriate sanction is to strike him off the roll.”
No exceptional circumstances were presented to justify a lesser penalty. The tribunal also noted that Pena’s misconduct extended over a lengthy period and involved a significant sum of client money.
The outcome was resolved by an agreed statement of facts between Pena and the SRA. The SDT accepted that the settlement reflected its guidance on sanctions and ensured proportionality, but stressed that removal from practice was unavoidable.
In addition to being struck off, Pena was ordered to pay £10,000 in costs.
The decision marks the end of Pena’s legal career nearly three decades after he qualified. His case adds to a series of disciplinary findings in recent years where solicitors under financial strain have turned to client accounts in breach of the rules, only to find the tribunal taking the harshest view of such misconduct.