Lawyer copied details of rival law firm’s bid to win £500K public contract. A SOLICITOR from the Edinburgh based law firm Dundas & Wilson has admitted stealing details from rival law firm Brodies LLP in order to win a £500,000 public contract involving five Scottish local authorities who proposed to share services for waste management and recycling.
Lawyer Keith Armstrong (41) who resigned from Dundas & Wilson in July 2012 after representatives of Renfrewshire Council contacted the law firm over the similarity of details contained in competitive bids, admitted in evidence to the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal he stole details from rival law firm Brodies LLP in order to help win the contract.
It transpired from the tribunal hearing that documents which Armstrong had ‘acquired’ came from papers held by his partner, Kate Mayor (36) who was at the time business development manager for Brodies LLP.
As a result of the tribunal hearing, Keith Armstrong has subsequently been struck off the roll of solicitors. He now works for energy giant SSE PLC, (formerly Scottish & Southern Electricity), who were recently fined £10.5m by industry regulator Ofgem for mis-selling gas & electricity contracts
The Scottish Sun reports:
LAWYER SWIPED FILES FOR £500K DEAL PLOT
Exclusive: By Russell Findlay 13 July 2014 Scottish Sun
A TOP lawyer stole secret files from a rival in a plot to win a £500,000 contract. Dundas & Wilson partner Keith Armstrong. 41. copied a draft bid belonging to blue chip competitor Brodies.
He admitted swiping the document from under the nose of innocent missus Kate Mayor, 36 - then Brodies business development manager before “fraudulently and deceitfully” using it in his own firm's tender.
A source said yesterday: "For a partner to commit what amounts to industrial espionage is unprecedented. The scandal has rocked the legal establishment."
The Edinburgh companies with combined turnover of £100million were battling for the contract from North Lanarkshire. North Ayrshire. East Dunbartonshire. East Renfrewshire and Renfrewshire councils in 2012.
Armstrong was rumbled after officials noticed 27 parts of the two rival bids were identical. He owned up to his bosses and quit before the contract was eventually won by Pinsent Masons.
Armstrong, right, of Edinburgh. was struck off following a probe by the Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal. Chairman Alan McDonald ruled: "His conduct is so grave it is very likely to bring the profession into disrepute."
The divorcee, now working for power giant SSE. last night refused to comment at the £615.000 home he shares with Ms Mayor in Morningside. Brodies also declined to comment.
SSDT REPORT CENSORED IDENTITIES OF LAW FIRM:
Curiously, the opinion published by the SSDT directed that neither Brodies LLP or Mr Armstrong’s current employer Scottish & Southern Energy should be mentioned by name or identified in any way in the report …
Tribunal heard lawyer ‘copied’ terms of bid from competitor. On or around 22 May 2012 a representative of RC (Renfrewshire Council) contacted D&W (Dundas & Wilson), noting that some concern had arisen in respect of certain similarities between the Tenders submitted by D&W and that submitted by another Tenderer. RC had compiled a comparison document setting out the relevant text of concern and by email of 22 May 2012 invited D&W to attend a meeting on 24 May 2012 to discuss matters.
The other Tenderer, namely Firm X (Brodies LLP), was also invited to a similar meeting on that date. D&W immediately commenced an internal investigation. In the course of said investigation the Respondent admitted to D&W that he had been responsible for the text that had been highlighted and that he had plagiarised these from another Tender document for the project belonging to Firm X.
In particular the Respondent accepted that on 28 or 29 April 2012 at his dwelling house, without the permission or consent of his partner, Ms B, who was at the time a Business Development Manager at Firm X, he accessed the Tender as prepared by Firm X for the project, copied parts of said draft Tender and made use of that information when completing D&W’s Tender for the project.
Amstrong was represented at the hearing by William Macreath of the Legal Defence Union & Levy McRae, the Law Society of Scotland was represented by Elaine Motion QC.
Tribunal Decision : The Tribunal having considered the Complaint at the instance of the Council of the Law Society of Scotland on behalf of Firm X against Keith Guy William Armstrong, formerly of Dundas & Wilson, Solicitors, Saltire Court, 20 Castle Terrace, Edinburgh and now c/o Levy McRae Solicitors, 266 St Vincent Street, Glasgow;
Find the Respondent guilty of Professional Misconduct in respect of his having accessed confidential information belonging to another firm of solicitors in relation to a project, having copied and thereafter used part of that firm’s Tender document in his own firm’s Tender and his fraudulently and/or deceitfully having allowed it to be submitted as his own firm’s work bringing his integrity into question;
his actions being deliberate and wholly inconsistent with the requirements to maintain mutual trust and confidence with his fellow solicitors in allowing a Tender to be submitted, part of which had been plagiarised from another firm’s Tender which he knew or ought to have known, was not only confidential but was of a commercially sensitive nature and his actions drawing the profession at large into disrepute;
Strike the Respondent Keith Guy William Armstrong from the Roll of Solicitors in Scotland;
Find the Respondent liable in the expenses of the Complainers and of the Tribunal including expenses of the Clerk, chargeable on a time and line basis as the same may be taxed by the Auditor of the Court of Session on an agent and client, client paying basis in terms of Chapter Three of the last published Law Society’s Table of Fees for general business with a unit rate of £14.00; and Direct that publicity will be given to this decision and that this publicity should include the name of the Respondent but will not include the name of Firm X or the Respondent’s current employer or otherwise identify them.
I suspect you would have to look long and hard to find an example of a Scottish Solicitor being struck off for doing exactly the same to a member of the public - but stealing from their own brethren, now that's a different matter all together.
ReplyDeleteStruck off but it seems still of use to the legal profession since they tried to cover up the names of law firms and his current employer SSE
ReplyDelete"acquired".. right..
ReplyDeleteThe ssdt finding is full of ..
I wonder who put him up to it, perhaps his silence is the price he paid for getting another job?
ReplyDeleteSLCC, Law Society and SSDT all follow the same principle, ruin clients but do not do wrong to your lawyer brother and sisters. Bunch of crooked scumbags.
ReplyDeleteNo surprise who the Law Society used for false propaganda then.
ReplyDeleteAs this was attempted fraud, why was he not reported to the police like every other individual would be?
Why did he even go to the SSDT if he had already resigned as a lawyer?
The decision to omit the name of Brodies was a vain attempt to save Brodie's reputation from corruption but is inconceivable that this guy's wife knew nothing about what he was doing?
Another incidence of the Law Society propaganda machine in action?
ReplyDeleteThis decision was made 4 months ago, so why wait until now to report on it?
In any case, this guy resigned in 2012 and so to deal with him at the Law Society's SSDT is a total con?
They should have reported him to the police and he should have been dealt with properly for what he did, instead of him getting the usual soft touch deal from the SSDT?
Typical of the Scottish Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal to sweep under the carpet details of the individual and his firm by failing to mention them by name in its decision - it just shows how deep rooted the 'cover up' mentality is instilled in the Scottish Legal Establishment.
ReplyDeleteNo surprise to see Levy McRae involved either.
sounds like a good idea to avoid doing business with any of this lot and the power company!
ReplyDeleteDundas & Wilson no longer exist as an independent law firm. Something to do with their business model but I wont say any more in case I upset someone.
ReplyDeleteSmall beer considering the amount of client data including bank statements etc I have personally seen copied between law firms.
ReplyDeleteAnd for the clients who dont give their solicitor access to accounts,the workaround is solicitor contacts bank of choice and finds out everything then the inevitable inflated fee.
The amount of forged letters granting solicitors access to client funds over the years must be in the tens of thousands but I dont see anyone raising this as an issue.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteStruck off but it seems still of use to the legal profession since they tried to cover up the names of law firms and his current employer SSE
31 July 2014 17:59
I was thinking the same myself!
What a sickening litany of lies?
ReplyDeleteThe SSDT cannot really think that the Scottish Public fall for this pile of horse shit?
This guy was clearly not in with the in-gang and was jettisoned for daring to rake in the cash at the expense of one of the in-gang and without giving the Law Society their cut?
What a load of monkey muck?
This SSDT guff is like an exercise in twisting the facts to fit with the Law Society's agenda.
ReplyDeleteThe sycophantic prose in defence of this fraudster is enough to make you gag it is so smelly.
This is not a Tribunal in any way shape or form.
It is a propaganda think tank carrying out the sick mind games of the Law Society.
This has all the hallmarks of a cleaned-up scandal, whereby it has been decided there has to be a fall guy to cover-up what has been going on?
ReplyDeletePossibly Scottish Law firms operating a Cartel whereby they both share info in order to increase everybody's tender where they all arrange for each of them to get a slice of the money cake and were caught out by a Local Government worker who was switched on?
This would certainly explain the nonsense excuse and the heated arguments between the firms...?
Let's face it, Crooked Scottish lawyers are trained to look for the lazy cheating angle on everything they touch and then point at 'the other guy' when the shit hits the fan?
The Law Society clean-up-crew must be toasting themselves for pulling the wool over the Scottish Public's eyes once again?
Lord Denning was rated (BY SOME!) as the finest judge of the 20th Century. In his book ‘WHAT NEXT IN THE LAW’ he wrote about ‘Abuse of Power’. “Whoever may be guilty of abuse of power, be it Government, State, Employer, Trade Union or whoever, the law must provide a speedy remedy. Otherwise the victims will find their own remedy. There will be anarchy.” A most important warning to the nation – though it is notable that Denning excluded the judiciary from his list of those who might abuse their power!
ReplyDeleteThis is a totally irrelevant story as the SSDT is a SHAM organisation and a proven dishonest and discredited rabble who are controlled by the Law Society of Scotland?
ReplyDeleteClearly the best thing to do here is avoid using any Scottish lawyer or their law firm.
ReplyDeleteThis also applies to their bigger customers because as you can see one lawyer from one firm swiped the details from another firm to get the business.
So there can be no client trust ever again and this is one of the main reasons the Law Society/SSDT tried to hide the names of those involved.
Isn't it amazing how Scottish lawyers can twist the truth to suit whatever situation they are in to evade responsibility for their actions?
ReplyDeleteThe Law Society consider this as bringing the profession into "DISREPUTE" . What would two solicitors colluding in a court case rate??
ReplyDeleteDo SSE bother to check up on their staff before recruiting or is stuff like this considered a bonus on a cv?
ReplyDeleteIts got me wondering who and what I am talking to every time I have to call my electric supplier!
This evidence of secrecy by hiding the law firm's name from the Scottish Public underlines that the SSDT is a protection racket for Scottish lawyers and it is only the lawyers who do not tow the line with the Law Society who get jettisoned, whereas all others get protection from the Law Society's SSDT?
ReplyDeleteAs always, there is a lot more that remains hidden by this propaganda vehicle?
Why was this guy not reported to the police and prosecuted like every other person would have been?
ReplyDeleteWhy are Scottish lawyers continually allowed to be above the law, where the Law Society of Scotland are allowed to cherry-pick which lawyers are punished and which Scottish lawyers are let off Scot Free?
The Law Society of Scotland and it's devious wings the SSDT and SLCC are all about giving the least possible sanctions to their members that they can get away with and at the same time acting vindictively against their Scottish lawyer's client victims?
This case is fishier than a bath tub of putrid rotting fish.
ReplyDeleteI do not trust a single word of the SSDT's findings and certainly do not trust the Law Society's own lawyer as she has history..
The false indignation by Scottish lawyers is laughable if it wasn't so serious.
ReplyDeleteSSDT report reads as a pack of lies.We all know what happened there and who did what.Ultimately this proves any information you pass to a solicitor is no longer confidential and their services to you are not worth the money.
ReplyDeleteJust to let you know everyone is getting a big kick out of Brodies being named in this story after the efforts some at the LSoS made to keep them out of it.
ReplyDeleteIts hard to believe anything a solicitors tribunal comes up with when they spend more time trying to hide facts than publish them.
ReplyDeleteFundamentally dishonest.
This blog is a national treasure.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThe Law Society consider this as bringing the profession into "DISREPUTE" . What would two solicitors colluding in a court case rate??
2 August 2014 22:00
.................................
From the Law Society, the SLCC or the SSDT, probably a slap on the back or a round of applause?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteJust to let you know everyone is getting a big kick out of Brodies being named in this story after the efforts some at the LSoS made to keep them out of it.
4 August 2014 13:45
/////////////////////////////////
If you are in the LSoS's in-gang, they can wave their magic wand of whitewashing to make sure that your reputation is preserved, no matter the seriousness of the case?
Is this guy now with SSE or Levy McRae?
ReplyDeleteRemember the Law Society of Scotland have got previous on this, when they were 'striking off' their members only for them to be parachuted into work for another firm of solicitors so that they could keep billing unsuspecting members of the Public and in defiance of the law?
Of course, they tried to cover it all up?
I wonder who was the Law Society's lawyer then too?
This website is a God send to let us know what is going on behind our backs
ReplyDeleteNobody believes a single word of the SLCC. Such a discredited organisation.
ReplyDeleteWith Scottish lawyers having zero morals bourne out of the fact that the Law Society of Scotland have for years employed a system of slack or non-regulation, which has had the double-whammy effect of the ever declining standards and the belief amongst Scottish lawyers that they can break the law with impunity against their Clients, is it no wonder Scottish lawyers are in terminal decline?
ReplyDeleteOne is forced to ask not how prevalent is this type of fraud but more what did this guy do to the Law Society of Scotland to be cherry-picked as a propaganda tool for the Law Society of Scotland's lies about the health of the 'profession' in Scotland?