SDT strikes off Stephen Lawson for client-account breaches and false estate paperwork
A Yorkshire solicitor who dipped into client funds and papered over the gaps with false paperwork has been struck off the Roll. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found Stephen Allan Lawson’s conduct “extremely serious,” concluding that his misuse of client money, coupled with misleading cheque stubs, estate accounts and correspondence, made his continued presence in the profession untenable. Lawson, admitted in 1998 and formerly a partner at Hunton & Garget in Richmond, North Yorkshire, did not contest the core breaches. Allegations of dishonesty were left on file and not pursued, after the Tribunal accepted medical evidence that further litigation would be disproportionate.
The SRA’s investigation began after the firm reported irregularities in October 2013. Forensic officers identified a £6,940.60 client-account shortage caused by three withdrawals: £564.35 in July 2007, £3,850 in November 2007 and £2,526.25 in July 2008. Lawson admitted making each payment. The firm later replaced the shortfall from office funds in November 2013, but the damage was already done: the money had been removed in breach of Rule 22 of the Solicitors Accounts Rules 1998 and used for the benefit of someone not entitled—or for Lawson himself.
The first withdrawal surfaced when a long-forgotten legacy in the estate of “P (deceased)” fell due. With nothing left on the ledger, Lawson wrote a cheque to the beneficiary for £564.35, but recorded the stub as “NYCC Rent Owing” and debited it to a completely different estate (“O (deceased)”), where he was acting as executor. He later told investigators he “panicked” and accepted that the entry concealed the shortfall. The second and third cheques were written on the O estate and made payable to Lawson personally; yet the cheque stubs described them as payments to North Yorkshire County Council for an “early surrender of lease” and to “JR Smith & Sons repairs.” The stubs were false. So were the estate accounts, which repeated the invented “early surrender” payment and claimed a £4,000 retention for supposed expenses to JR Smith & Sons. Three charities—beneficiaries of the O estate—queried the retention, and Lawson sent them letters maintaining the pretence of farm repairs and ongoing liabilities. No such payments were due or made.
Embed from Getty ImagesInvestigators pressed Lawson for proof that he had personally paid cash for works and then reimbursed himself. There were no invoices, bank statements, file notes or lease checks; there was no evidence of landlord consent or scope of works. Lawson also produced a handwritten statement after visiting a witness, only for a later typed statement from the same person to contradict him and say she knew of no such repairs, save for grass cutting by a neighbour. The SDT held that preparing and submitting misleading stubs, accounts and letters—and obtaining a statement that was “materially incorrect”—undermined the administration of justice and public trust.
Lawson accepted sweeping breaches: improper withdrawals from client account; acting without integrity; conduct likely to diminish trust; and failing to uphold the rule of law. He relied on medical evidence of a longstanding mental health condition dating from around 2006 and character references, and he expressed remorse. He has not practised since leaving the firm in April 2013 and said he has no wish to remain on the Roll.
In sanction, the Tribunal cited Bolton v Law Society and the profession’s uncompromising requirement for integrity and trustworthiness. Even absent a concluded finding of dishonesty, the misconduct reached a high level: taking client money, masking it with knowingly inaccurate records, misleading beneficiaries and sending false explanations. Lesser penalties—reprimand, fine, restrictions or suspension—were rejected as inadequate. Striking off was, in the SDT’s view, the minimum necessary to protect the public and maintain confidence in the profession. Lawson was ordered to pay £23,000 costs, which he indicated would be met by instalments.