Forum Home» Praise, Vent & Warnings

Town & Country Law + De Vita Platt Solicitors

New Post Advanced Search

Town & Country Law + De Vita Platt Solicitors

253 replies 42.7K views
Paul_VarjakPaul_Varjak Forumite
4.7K posts
Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
✭✭✭✭
EDIT (23/07/2020)
SINCE THE CLOSURE OF DE VITA PLATT SOLICITORS AND THE STRIKE OFF OF THREE SOLICITORS AT THE FIRM, I WAS INFORMED BY SOME VIEWERS OF THIS THREAD THAT THE PARTNERS OF DE VITA PLATT SOLICITORS WAS BEING PROSECUTED WITH OTHERS FOR ALLEGED FRAUD INVOLVING TOWN & COUNTRY LAW (A law firm set up by the former partners of De Vita Platt Solicitors). THE FIRST FEW PAGES OF THIS THREAD ONLY REFER TO DE VITA PLATT SOLICITORS BUT LATTER PAGES REFER TO TOWN AND COUNTRY LAW.


De Vita Platt Solicitors was intervened (closed down) by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) on 19 January 2018. Three solicitors at the practice had their practicing certificates suspended at the same time time:

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/395381.article?Decision=2018-01-19
https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/533579.article?Decision=2018-01-19
https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/432386.article?Decision=2018-01-19
https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/558810.article?Decision=2017-02-20

A Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) substantive hearing involving all three solicitors concluded on 7 December 2018. The outcome of the tribunal has yet to be publicly announced but should be available on the SRA website within the next 10 days. You can follow latest updates here:

http://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/recent-decisions/recent-decisions.page

The SDT will publish its full findings against all three solicitors in about seven weeks but anyone wishing to know the outcome of the hearing may phone the SDT now on: 020 7329 4808.

I will publish the outcome of the hearing here once it has been published on the SRA website and later provide links to the full SDT Judgement.
Any opinions are my own unless otherwise stated.
«13456726

Replies

  • DoaMDoaM Forumite
    11.2K posts
    10,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    What's the back-story? Without it then this is merely a "Meh" topic for most people.
    Diary of a madman
    Walk the line again today
    Entries of confusion
    Dear diary, I'm here to stay
  • Paul_VarjakPaul_Varjak Forumite
    4.7K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    DoaM wrote: »
    What's the back-story? Without it then this is merely a "Meh" topic for most people.

    Read the first four links above to get a 'flavour' of the allegations made against these three solicitors. Until the SDT publishes its full judgement we don't know for sure if any additional allegations arose from the intervention.

    I know many people local to Barton-Upon-Humber are keen to know the outcome of the hearing but it has been six days without any formal announcement being made. The story may not be of interest to a wider audience but it will certainly be of interest to those affected by the activities of De Vita Platt Solicitors.

    By contacting the SDT, interested parties can find the outcome of the hearing NOW!

    When the SDT publishes its full judgement, it will be available here:
    http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/judgment-search-results#search

    Request for recordings of the hearing should be sent to [email protected], or in writing to the following address:

    Klaudia Lyczkowska
    Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal
    5th Floor Gate House
    1 Farringdon Street
    London
    EC4M 7LG

    Depending on the size of the audio file, there may charge a £10 fee to provide the recording.on DVD, otherwise it will be sent free by email.
    Any opinions are my own unless otherwise stated.
  • edited 23 January 2019 at 5:37PM
    Paul_VarjakPaul_Varjak Forumite
    4.7K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    edited 23 January 2019 at 5:37PM
    All three solicitors were struck off the Solicitors' Roll.

    Both former partners of De Vita Platt Solicitors are jointly and severally liable for SRA costs of £143,000.

    The third Solicitor is liable for SRA costs of £2,000.
    Any opinions are my own unless otherwise stated.
  • societys_childsocietys_child Forumite
    7K posts
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    . . cool story
  • edited 23 January 2019 at 5:43PM
    Paul_VarjakPaul_Varjak Forumite
    4.7K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    edited 23 January 2019 at 5:43PM
    [redacted name]
    Solicitor
    395381
    Closure
    Date: 19 January 2018
    Decision - closure
    Outcome: Intervention

    Outcome date: 19 January 2018

    Published date: 19 January 2018

    Firm details
    Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

    Name: Quality Solicitors de Vita Platt

    Address(es): 90-92 High Street, Barton-upon-Humber, DN18 5PU

    Firm ID: 533579

    Outcome details
    This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

    Decision details
    To intervene into the practice of [redacted] at Quality Solicitors De Vita Platt.

    Reasons/basis
    Mr [redacted name] has failed to comply with rules made by the SRA under section 32 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (Solicitors Act 1974, Schedule 1, Part I, paragraph 1(1)(c)); and
    It is necessary to intervene to protect the interests of clients and former clients of Mr [redacted name].
    Intervening agents
    [redacted name] of Gordons LLP, Forward House, 8 Duke St. Bradford, BD1 3QX has been appointed as the intervening agent. [phone and email address redacted]

    Prosecution
    Date: 20 February 2017
    Decision - prosecution
    Outcome: Referral to Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

    Outcome date: 20 February 2017

    Published date: 6 November 2017

    Firm details
    Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

    Name: Quality Solicitors De Vita Platt

    Address(es): 90-92 High Street, Barton-Upon-Humber, South Humberside, DN18 5PU

    Firm ID: 533579

    Outcome details
    This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

    Reasons/basis
    This notification relates to a Decision to prosecute before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. This is an independent Tribunal which will reach its own decision after considering all the evidence, including any evidence put forward by the Solicitor. The Tribunal has certified that there is a case to answer in respect of allegations which are or include that, whilst a Partner of and practising as a solicitor for the Firm:

    1. Between July and October 2016 he certified ID1 (Certificate of Identity for Private Individual) Forms for Mr S, Mrs S and Ms R, in connection with a transfer of property without:

    1.1 having met the individuals whose identity he sought to certify; and/ or

    1.2 having seen the original identity documents for the individuals he sought to certify;

    2. Between around August 2013 and November 2013 he signed some or all bills of costs, which included bills of costs for work that had not been carried out in relation to the matters for Client S and/ or Client B;

    3. He caused or allowed a shortage of at least £44,080.46 to arise on the Firm’s Client Account in that he authorised transfers from the Client Account to the Firm’s Office Account in payment of bills of costs in circumstances where Client S and Client B had not been sent written confirmation of the costs incurred and some or all of those costs were not warranted;

    4. He failed to supervise a member of staff at the Firm adequately or at all between June 2010 and September 2012 when she was a paralegal at the Firm and/ or between September 2012 and November 2014 when she was a Trainee Solicitor at the Firm;

    The allegations are subject to a Hearing before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and are as yet unproven.
    Any opinions are my own unless otherwise stated.
  • edited 23 January 2019 at 5:46PM
    Paul_VarjakPaul_Varjak Forumite
    4.7K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    edited 23 January 2019 at 5:46PM
    [redacted name]
    Solicitor
    432386
    Closure
    Date: 19 January 2018
    Decision - closure
    Outcome: Intervention

    Outcome date: 19 January 2018

    Published date: 19 January 2018

    Firm details
    Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

    Name: Quality Solicitors de Vita Platt

    Address(es): 90-92 High Street, Barton-upon-Humber, DN18 5PU

    Firm ID: 533579

    Outcome details
    This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

    Decision details
    To intervene into the practice of [redacted name] at Quality Solicitors De Vita Platt.

    Reasons/basis
    Mr Platt has failed to comply with rules made by the SRA under section 32 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (Solicitors Act 1974, Schedule 1, Part I, paragraph 1(1)(c)); and
    It is necessary to intervene to protect the interests of clients and former clients of Mr [redacted name]
    Intervening agents
    John Owen of Gordons LLP, Forward House, 8 Duke St. Bradford, BD1 3QX has been appointed as the intervening agent. [redacted name and email address]

    Prosecution
    Date: 20 February 2017
    Decision - prosecution
    Outcome: Referral to Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

    Outcome date: 20 February 2017

    Published date: 6 November 2017

    Firm details
    Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

    Name: Quality Solicitors De Vita Platt

    Address(es): 90-92 High Street, Barton-Upon-Humber, South Humberside, DN18 5PU

    Firm ID: 533579

    Outcome details
    This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

    Reasons/basis
    This notification relates to a Decision to prosecute before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. This is an independent Tribunal which will reach its own decision after considering all the evidence, including any evidence put forward by the Solicitor. The Tribunal has certified that there is a case to answer in respect of allegations which are or include that, whilst a Partner of and practising as a solicitor for the Firm:

    1. In relation to a matrimonial matter for Client S:

    1.1 Between around July 2013 and November 2013 he falsified documents purporting to contain Client S’s signature, for the purpose of drawing down funds from the Funding Loan;

    1.2 Between 8 August 2013 and 20 November 2013 he drew down funds and/or instructed a colleague to draw down funds totalling up to £6,500.00 from Client S’s legal funding loan without Client S’s knowledge or permission;

    1.3 Between 8 August 2013 and 23 October 2014 he raised and/ or instructed a colleague to raise some or all of the bills of costs which included bills of costs for work that he knew had not been carried out;

    1.4 Between 8 August 2013 and 23 October 2014 he signed some or all bills of costs which included bills of costs for work that had not been carried out;

    1.5 He caused or allowed a shortage of £9,562.84 to arise on the Firm’s Client Account in that transfers were made from the Client Account to the Firm’s Office Account in payment of bills of costs in circumstances where Client S had not been sent written confirmation of those costs;

    1.6 He failed to use the sum of £9,562.84 paid into the Firm’s Client Account by Client S on 17 February 2014 for the intended purpose of redeeming Client S’ funding loan; In relation to matters for Client B:

    1.7 Between 9 August 2013 and 18 November 2013 he raised some or all of bills of costs, which included bills of costs for work that he knew had not been carried out;

    1.8 Between 9 August 2013 and 18 November 2013 he signed some or all bills of costs, which included bills of costs for work that had not been carried out;

    1.9 He caused or allowed a shortage of at least £34,517.62 to arise on the Firm’s Client Account in that transfers were made from the Client Account to the Firm’s Office Account in payment of bills of costs in circumstances where Client B had not been sent written confirmation of those costs and/ or some or all of those costs were not warranted;

    1.10 He failed to supervise a member of staff at the Firm adequately or at all between June 2010 and September 2012 when she was a paralegal at the Firm and/ or between September 2012 and November 2014 when she was a Trainee Solicitor at the Firm;

    The allegations are subject to a Hearing before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and are as yet unproven.
    Any opinions are my own unless otherwise stated.
  • edited 23 January 2019 at 5:49PM
    Paul_VarjakPaul_Varjak Forumite
    4.7K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    edited 23 January 2019 at 5:49PM
    [redacted solicitor name]
    Solicitor
    558810
    Prosecution
    Date: 20 February 2017
    Decision - prosecution
    Outcome: Referral to Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

    Outcome date: 20 February 2017

    Published date: 6 November 2017

    Firm details
    Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome

    Name: Quality Solicitors De Vita Platt

    Address(es): 90-92 High Street, Barton-Upon-Humber, South Humberside, DN18 5PU

    Firm ID: 533579

    Outcome details
    This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

    Reasons/basis
    This notification relates to a Decision to prosecute before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. This is an independent Tribunal which will reach its own decision after considering all the evidence, including any evidence put forward by the Solicitor. The Tribunal has certified that there is a case to answer in respect of allegations which are or include that, whilst employed as a Trainee Solicitor at the Firm:-

    In relation to a matrimonial matter for Client S:

    Between 20 August 2013 and 23 October 2014 she raised some or all bills of costs which included bills of costs for work that she knew had not been carried out;
    Between 8 August 2013 and 20 November 2013 she drew down funds totalling up to £6,500.00, from Client S’ legal funding loan using documents which she knew to be forged with Client S’ signature without Client S’ knowledge or permission;
    She failed to promptly report her actions above, and/ or those she alleged against a colleague, to the SRA at any time before 25 January 2015, after she had left the Firm’s employment;
    The allegations are subject to a Hearing before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and are as yet unproven.
    Any opinions are my own unless otherwise stated.
  • agrinnallagrinnall
    23.3K posts
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    We really don't care.
  • theonlywayisuptheonlywayisup Forumite
    14.6K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Do you really have to include the details from the links.
  • Paul_VarjakPaul_Varjak Forumite
    4.7K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    I know it sounds boring at the moment to those who have not been clients of De Vita Platt. But I think your interest may well be piqued in a few weeks time.


    In the meantime, any comment helps to keep the thread active but if you are really not interested, you at perfect liberty to make my posts invisible.
    Any opinions are my own unless otherwise stated.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support