SDT strikes off Yunus Agboola Alatise for £10k misappropriation; £12k costs also ordered
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has struck off solicitor Yunus Agboola Alatise after finding he dishonestly misappropriated £10,000 of client money.
Alatise, admitted in 2006, practised as a sole practitioner at Abby & Nat Solicitors in London. In December 2015, the Tribunal ordered his removal from the roll after considering a series of breaches of the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Accounts Rules 2011.
The case centred on a £30,000 property deposit paid in May 2012 by client Tejpal Sahota. Instead of placing the money into a client account, as required, Alatise paid it into the office account. Only £20,000 reached the seller’s solicitors. The remaining £10,000 was diverted and later admitted by Alatise to have been used for business expenses.
When questioned, Alatise claimed that Sahota had agreed to lend him the £10,000 personally. The Tribunal rejected this explanation, noting there was no written record of such an arrangement and accepting Sahota’s evidence that the full sum was a deposit.
Embed from Getty ImagesThe panel found Alatise’s conduct dishonest. It said: “All the reliable evidence pointed to the £10,000 not being a personal loan to the Respondent.” The Tribunal concluded he had knowingly concealed his actions, satisfying both the objective and subjective tests for dishonesty.
Other breaches were uncovered. A forensic investigation reported a £20,103 shortage on the firm’s client account as of October 2013. In a separate matter, damages of £7,953 recovered for client Mr TK were wrongly directed to the office account instead of the client account. Sahota also paid £5,000 on account of costs, but only £1,800 was properly invoiced, leaving £3,200 unaccounted for.
The Tribunal held that Alatise had breached Rules 7 and 14.1 of the SRA Accounts Rules. Dishonesty was proven in relation to the £10,000 retained from Sahota’s property deposit. Allegation 1.3, concerning the handling of the £5,000 on account, was dismissed but the Tribunal still recorded concern over how funds were treated.
In sanctioning, the panel described Alatise’s behaviour as “a serious departure from the complete integrity, probity and trustworthiness expected of a solicitor.” It highlighted the harm caused to Sahota, who had to borrow funds to complete the purchase.
The Tribunal also found that Alatise fabricated the story of a loan to conceal his misappropriation. It said he had shown little insight and had not repaid the losses. The panel ruled there were no exceptional circumstances to justify a lesser sanction and confirmed that dishonesty involving client money almost always results in striking off.
The SRA sought costs of £16,570.54, but after discussions, the parties agreed on £12,000. The Tribunal ordered Alatise to pay that sum, though enforcement was suspended without leave of the Tribunal in light of his impecuniosity.
The final order struck Yunus Agboola Alatise off the roll of solicitors and directed him to pay £12,000 in costs.