No charges for lawyer who stole from clients & bank – Crown Office. A SOLICITOR who embezzled over £1 million from a bank has escaped criminal charges – because the Law Society of Scotland - who control self regulation of solicitors and the tribunals who ‘prosecute’ rogue lawyers - did not call for the case to be taken up by Police or prosecutors.
David Lyons (64) – who has appeared numerous times before the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal (SSDT) was struck off from the roll of solicitors after the tribunal heard in a recent case Lyons had consistently ripped-off clients and executry estates by charging excessive amounts for work and fees.
It also emerged during an investigation Lyons had secured a £1,010,000 property loan from the Bank of Ireland - but kept the cash for himself.
His business partner - Duncan Drummond, of Pollokshields, Glasgow, who was also found guilty of ripping off clients - was struck off at the same hearing.
In one case Drummond charged £15,700 for work he’d carried out which auditors calculated should actually have totalled £2,350 – a mark up of 568%. In another case he sent out a £4,000 bill for £1,125 worth of work.
Despite the severity of fraud and consistent breach of client trust, there is no mention in the tribunal’s findings of any move to refer the case to Police Scotland or the Crown Office – who have both since confirmed no action is being taken against Mr Lyons or anyone from the now defunct law firm of Lyons Laing, which had offices in Greenock and Glasgow.
The ‘independent’ Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) has also not issued any comment on the case or the lack of action against Lyons and his business partner.
The Scottish Sun newspaper reports:
'Untouchable' lawyer fury: Bent brief in £1m bank theft let-off
CROOK DODGES CASH GRAB
EXCLUSIVE by RUSSELL FINDLAY 14 Feb 2016
A CROOKED lawyer dodged prosecution despite nicking more than £1million.
David Lyons, 64, was struck off after embezzling the money from the Bank of Ireland.
But the Crown Office will not put him in the dock or use proceeds of crime laws to claw back the cash.
Former Labour minister Brian Wilson blasted the decision.
He said: “There are people in jail for embezzling £1,000 but as a lawyer he’s untouchable.
“It’s an example of the madness where lawyers are treated as a separate class of citizen.”
Lyons, of Kilmacolm, Renfrewshire, was struck off over eight counts of professional misconduct, including pocketing the £1.04million in a commercial property deal.
The Dublin-based bank — bailed out with 3.5billion euros of taxpayers’ cash after the 2008 economic crash — would not discuss the case.
But Fergus O’Dowd, who is on the Irish parliament’s justice committee, said: “If they won’t pursue him in Scotland’s criminal courts they should go after the money.”
He added: “It’s a disgrace the bank won’t comment.”
Lyons ran Lyons Laing in Greenock, where clients were ripped off with hugely inflated fees over a decade.
His colleague Duncan Drummond, of Pollokshields, Glasgow, was also struck off over four counts of misconduct.
Mr Wilson is also calling for an end to self-regulation by legal watchdog the Law Society of Scotland.
An LSS spokesman said a judicial factor was appointed in 2009 to run Lyons’ company.
He added: “The factor has an obligation to report findings to the Law Society and Crown Office.”
The Crown said: “There are no criminal or civil recovery proceedings against someone of that name.”
Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal Hearing & Decision: Having heard submissions on behalf of the Complainers and the Second Respondent in mitigation and having noted three previous Findings of professional misconduct against the First Respondent and one previous Finding of professional misconduct against the Second Respondent, the Tribunal pronounced an Interlocutor in the following terms:-
The Tribunal having considered the Complaint dated 9 April 2015 at the instance of the Council of the Law Society of Scotland against David Richard Blair Lyons, residing at Greenways, Pacemuir Road, Kilmalcolm ("the First Respondent") and Duncan Hugh Drummond, residing at Flat 1/2, 80 Kirkcaldy Road, Pollockshields, Glasgow ("the Second Respondent");
Find the First Respondent guilty of professional misconduct in respect of his failure to respond to correspondence from the Complainers, his failure to obtemper statutory notices, his taking of grossly excessive fees from executry estates, his failure to comply with the requirements of the Accounts Rules, his taking of fees from the sale proceeds of a property to which he was not entitled, his failure to obtemper letters of obligation, his taking of fees without rendering fee notes, and his embezzlement of the sum of £1,040,000 from the Bank of Ireland;
Find the Second Respondent guilty of professional misconduct in respect of his taking of grossly excessive fees from executry estates, his taking of fees without rendering fee notes, his failure to comply with the requirements of the Accounts Rules and his failure to supervise his firm's assistant, in breach of the undertaking given by him to the Complainers; Order that the name of the First Respondent be Struck Off the Roll of Solicitors in Scotland; Order that the name of the Second Respondent be Struck Off the Roll of Solicitors in Scotland.
THE LYONS SHARE - How law firm employed legal industry’s commonly used overcharging scams to rip off wills & executry estates:
In the executry of Mr E, the Respondents took fees totaling £15,950.00 excluding VAT during the period 21 June 2007 to 7 April 2009. A file audit by the Auditor of Court at Greenock assessed the fees due to the firm for that period to be £8,597.00 excluding VAT. The overcharge was 86%. The Second Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
In the executry of Mr AE, the Respondents took fees totaling £12,500.00 excluding VAT during the period 6 December 2004 and 26 June 2008. A file audit by the Auditor of Court at Greenock assessed the fees due to the firm for that period to be £4,338.05 excluding VAT. The overcharge was 188%. The First Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
In the executry of Mr F, the Respondents took fees totalling £15,700 excluding VAT during the period 3 April 2007 to 23 December 2008. A file audit by the Auditor of Court at Greenock assessed the fees due to the firm for that period to be £2,350.00 excluding VAT. The overcharge was 568%. The Second Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
In the executry of Mrs G, the Respondents took fees totalling £13,100.00 excluding VAT during the period 12 April 2006 and 4 August 2008. A file audit by the Auditor of Court at Greenock assessed the fees due to the firm for that period to be £5,917.03 excluding VAT. The overcharge was 121%. The Second Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
In the executry of Mrs H, the Respondents took fees totalling £8,000.00 excluding VAT during the period 5 July 2007 and 6 April 2009. A file audit by the Auditor of Court at Greenock assessed the fees due to the firm for that period to be £4,642 excluding VAT. The overcharge was 72%. The Second Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
In the executry of Mr I, the Respondents took fees totalling £4,000.00 excluding VAT during the period 26 February 2008 to April 2009. A file audit by the Auditor of Court at Glasgow assessed the fees due to the firm for that period to be £1,125 excluding VAT. The overcharge was 256%. The Second Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
In the executry of Mr J the Respondents took fees between November 2004 and May 2008 which exceeded by £90,000 or thereby the value of the work as assessed by the Auditor of Greenock sheriff court. The Second Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
In the executry of Mr M, the Respondents took fees of £2,000.00 plus VAT in December 2006 and £2,500.00 plus VAT in November 2007. On neither occasion did the Respondents issue a fee note. The Auditor of Court assessed the fees due to the Respondents as £3,397.00 plus VAT. The overcharge is therefore £603.00 plus VAT. The First Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
Also in relation to this case, the assistance of the Complainers having been invoked by Ms N, the executor, and the files having been provided to the Complainers, on 15 August 2008 the First Respondent wrote to the Complainers asking for the files to be returned for Taxation. The files were sent to the First Respondent on 1 September 2008. Thereafter the Complainers wrote to the First Respondent requesting return of the files on 10 and 21 October 2008, 10 November 2008 and 7 January 2009. No response was ever sent by the First Respondent. On 16 January 2009 the Complainers issued a notice under Section 42C of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 requiring return of the file. The First Respondent did not return the file. The Complainers wrote with a list of conduct issues to the First Respondent on 25 February 2009 arising out of this executry. No response was ever received from the First Respondent. The files were eventually recovered from the Judicial Factor.
In the executry of Ms O between 20 May 2008 and 28 May the Respondents deducted fees without rendering fee notes to the executor, Mr P, in breach of Rule 6(d) of the Solicitors (Scotland) Accounts etc Rules 2001. The Second Respondent was principally in charge of this case.
Yes indeed a regulation robber backed up by self regulation where robbers look after their own
ReplyDeleteHow law firm employed legal industry’s commonly used overcharging scams to rip off wills & executry estates
ReplyDeleteSPOT ON!!!
What is the point really?If you think about it for a minute because prosecutors are on the take then they dont allow the cops to investigate bent lawyers and the judges are either old pals of the lawyers or their kids work at the same bloody firm and must be hushed up.
ReplyDeleteConclusion the whole justice system is rotten to the core
Overcharging wills by 250%++++ disgusting no wonder the Law Society always run their Write a will campaign so their members can get more victims to rip off and then the Law Society do nothing about it because the lawyers are happy and they can pump all the money back into the legal profession this is the real motive for letting these guys off the hook and no Police or court!
ReplyDeleteStole a million and gets away with it just because he is a lawyer!
ReplyDeleteI know someone who is going through the closing of their dead husband's estate and the lawyer has been stalling for over a year on settling up while his bills keep hitting the widow.
ReplyDeleteShe reckons the lawyer is after the house because he keeps trying to persuade her to sell up and says he has a buyer lined up you should see some of the letters saying you would be better off selling and move away from remembering your husband and so on.Lawyers are really evil
by the sounds of the 1040am comment this is another property going to fall into the hands of crooked lawyers
ReplyDeleteThere can be no excuse for this widespread, openly corrupt conduct which allows a lawyer - Any Lawyer - to escape prosecution.
ReplyDeleteSelf Regulation MUST END NOW!