SRA rebukes solicitor after criminal conviction for failing to provide a breath specimen
A solicitor has been rebuked by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) following a criminal conviction for failing to provide a breath specimen after her arrest on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol. The regulatory settlement agreement, dated 23 June 2026 and published on 29 June 2026, concerns Natalie Elizabeth Georgina Todd, a solicitor at Cooke, Young & Keidan LLP in London.
According to the agreement, Mrs Todd was approached by Avon and Somerset Police on 26 April 2025 after concerns were raised by a member of the public while she was driving. She provided a roadside breath sample before being arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol.
At the police custody unit, Mrs Todd was asked to provide two breath specimens for analysis. Although she attempted to do so, she failed to provide the required samples within the statutory time limit. She was subsequently charged with failing to provide a specimen for analysis, contrary to section 7(6) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
On 5 June 2025, Mrs Todd appeared before Taunton Magistrates’ Court, where she pleaded guilty and was convicted of the offence. The court imposed a 22-month driving disqualification, which may be reduced by 22 weeks upon successful completion of an approved course. Mrs Todd was also ordered to complete 80 hours of unpaid work within 12 months and pay £85 in prosecution costs together with a £114 surcharge.
As part of the SRA’s investigation, Mrs Todd admitted that her criminal conviction amounted to breaches of Principle 1 and Principle 2 of the SRA Principles. These principles require solicitors to uphold the proper administration of justice and to behave in a way that maintains public trust and confidence in the legal profession.
The SRA concluded that a written rebuke was the appropriate regulatory outcome. In reaching its decision, the regulator took into account several mitigating factors. These included that this was Mrs Todd’s first criminal offence, she had no previous regulatory history, she self-reported both the charge and conviction promptly, and she had expressed regret while reflecting on her conduct. The SRA also considered the likelihood of reoffending to be low.
The regulator stated that criminal convictions involving solicitors are always investigated because of the importance of maintaining public confidence in both the legal profession and the wider justice system. It also noted that failing to provide a lawfully requested breath specimen is specifically identified within its guidance as conduct capable of undermining the proper administration of justice.
Under the agreement, Mrs Todd accepted the written rebuke, agreed to the publication of the outcome, and will pay £300 towards the SRA’s investigation costs.