Andrew Penman – suspended by Law Society. A SOLICITOR
from the Scottish Borders who was once accused by Law Society
investigators of faking up evidence in files and deliberately deceiving
banks and the Inland Revenue has been suspended by the Law Society of
Scotland after a string of scandals relating to his clients legal
affairs and dodgy legal practices.
ANDREW PATERSON PENMAN, solicitor
with the Kelso law firm of Stormonth Darling Solicitors was suspended
late last year by the Law Society of Scotland, who quietly announced
Penman’s suspension in the Gazette: Notice is hereby given that
the practising certificate of ANDREW PATERSON PENMAN, solicitor,
Stormonth Darling, Bank of Scotland Buildings, 8/9 The Square, Kelso,
TD5 7HQ was suspended under Sections 39a and 40 of the Solicitors’
(Scotland) Act 1980 with effect from 2 October 2014.
The order announcing Penman's suspension was ironically signed by James Ness,
Deputy Registrar – the same solicitor who once defended Penman during a
Complaints Committee hearing. Ness - a partner at Austins Solicitors,
Dalbeattie, Dumfries & Galloway - represented Penman at Law Society
complaints hearings. Ness gave a submission at the time demanding the
Complaints Committee change its decision from one of prosecuting Penman
before the Scottish Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal – to a slap on the
wrist. The move was controversial and heavily reported in the national
and local press at the time.
Penman has now been linked to a case in the Court of Session - Ladykirk
Estates Limited, Academy House, Shedden Park Road, Kelso, (Ledingham
Chalmers Llp) V Roxburghshire AG V Stormonth Darling W.S. Solicitors,
Drew Penman, Terry Mcnally and Craig Wood, Bank Of Scotland Buildings,
The Square, Kelso, Roxburghshire
Court staff have indicated the case is one of a
significant financial claim against Penman and other solicitors based at
Stormonth Darling in Kelso.
Andrew Paterson Penman was employed as a Director (SOLICITOR) at LADYKIRK ESTATES LIMITED
from 01 June 2007 to 17 September 2012 , Company address: LADYKIRK
ESTATES LIMITED ACADEMY HOUSE, SHEDDEN PARK ROAD, KELSO, ROXBURGHSHIRE,
TD5 7AL
Andrew Paterson Penman was also employed as a Director (SOLICITOR) at S.P.C. BORDERS from 31 January 2006 to 30 November 2014 Company address: S.P.C. BORDERS 27 MARKET STREET, GALASHIELS, TD1 3AF
It has also been revealed Penman and his law firm are
being investigated by the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission &
Law Society of Scotland in connection with a number of complaints made
by clients where substantial sums of money into hundreds of thousands of pounds along with queries regarding unpaid rent and disappeared funds are alleged.
Solicitor Craig Wood - the only remaining solicitor
at Stormonth Darling ‘took ill’ leading to the Law Society closing the
firm down. It has since been announced another local law firm, Cullen
Kilshaw, has agreed to take on some of the business of Stormonth
Darling.
In 2009, Scottish Law Reporter covered a story
relating to Ladykirk Estates & Andrew ‘Drew’ Penman – after both
lost a legal challenge in Scotland’s Land Court. LadyKirk Estates
objected to the transfer of a farm tenancy from an elderly tenant to his
younger nephew. Ladykirk had also claimed their ECHR rights had been in
breach. Full report HERE
CHEQUERED HISTORY OF BORDERS LAWYER WHO RUINED CLIENTS:
Penman – Originally from Hawick then moved to
Kelso to work at Stormonth Darling Solicitors, has been subject to
numerous complaints from local clients in the Scottish Borders over the
years, One investigation carried out by the Law Society of Scotland
issued reports finding Penman had deliberately rearranged evidence
before investigating officers took possession of the files in an attempt
to prevent the Law Society’s own reporter from investigating the
circumstances of the losses. The Law Society investigating reporter
found “there was also evidence of what appeared to be a bungled and unsuccessful attempt to put the file into order
Law Society found Andrew Penman deliberately mislead Royal Bank of Scotland, amounting to professional misconduct. Page two of the Law Society report said : “The
reporter noted there was a complete failure on the part of Messrs. P.
& J. Stormonth-Darling to deal with this matter. They completely
failed to acknowledge the instructions they had received from the Royal
Bank in this connection and failed to take any steps to deal with the
matter. The reporter was of the view that the substantial and
unnecessary delays which had taken place in the executry might amount
not only to an inadequate professional service on the part of Messrs.
P.& J. Stormonth Darling but professional misconduct on the part of
Mr Penman the solicitor dealing with the matter up until the time the
complaint was lodged with the Law Society on 17th October 1994. Further
the reporter was of the view that the apparent deliberate attempt to
mislead the Royal Bank in regard to the Banco di Roma account may amount
to professional misconduct.”
The Law Society investigating lawyer went onto demand a prosecution of Andrew Penman, saying : “In
respect of the extraordinary delays and the repeated failures to
respond to correspondence and the apparent, deliberate attempt to
mislead the Royal Bank the reporter was of the view that the
professional misconduct was such that it would warrant prosecution
before the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal The reporter was or
the view that there had clearly been an inadequate professional service
but in the, event of a referral to the Scottish Solicitors Discipline
Tribunal this would be incorporated into the complaint.”
In several damning verdicts, the Law Society’s
investigating officer found that Penman had DELIBERATELY MISLED the
Royal Bank of Scotland, while documents involving correspondence from
the then INLAND REVENUE now Her Majesty’s Revenue & Custons (HMRC)
showed Penman had also deliberately misled tax inspectors after vast
sums of money disappeared from the deceased’s estate in an organised
attempt by the Executor, a Borders Accountant identified as Norman
Howitt to pay the monies over to the deceased’s wife and then into a
SECRET TRUST FUND controlled by Howitt himself and revealed in an
article on Scottish Law Reporter in 2007, HERE where evidence revealed Howitt had INCREDIBLY even taken possession of the deceased’s widow’s pension book.
Law Society Complaints Committee said Andrew Penman mislead the Royal Bank, was a failure at handling an executry. The Committee’s consideration of the investigating lawyer’s findings revealed : “The
Committee expressed grave concern at the way that this executry had
been handled by Mr. Penman and the extraordinary delays and the complete
failure to deal with correspondence in an adequate manner, The
Committee were of the: view that there: had been very poor attention
paid to the administration of this estate and that whilst the
complainer's uncertainty in certain matters might have caused some
confusion there was a general lack of effort on the part of the
solicitors to deal with matters in a reasonable manner.. It was noted in
connection with the proposed loan by the Royal Bank. to the complainer
there was a complete and utter failure to deal with the matter in any
way or even to acknowledge the instructions. In connection with the
Banco di Roma account the Committee noted the failure on the part of Mr.
Penman to deal with matters in a reasonable way. They were particularly
concerned at the terms of the letter written by Mr. Penman to the Royal
Bank on 29th September 1992 which appeared to be an attempt to mislead
the Royal Bank into believing that matters were being actively dealt
with when they were not.”
“The Committee concurred with the views of
the reporter in this matter indicating that the apparent attempt to
mislead the Royal Bank persuaded them that Mr Penman's acting in the
matter were so serious and reprehensible as to amount to professional
misconduct. The Committee thereafter considered whether the professional
misconduct was such that it would warrant referral to the Scottish
Solicitors Discipline Tribunal. The Committee were of the view that the
administration of the executry had been so appallingly badly done as to
take the issue out of service into that of conduct and coupled with the
apparent attempt to mislead the Royal Bank the conduct was such that it
would warrant prosecution before the Scottish Solicitors Discipline
Tribunal. The Committee were of the view that Mr, Penman's acting in
respect of the extra-ordinary delays and failure to progress the
administration of the executry and in apparently misleading the Royal
Bank of Scotland were so serious and reprehensible as to amount to
professional misconduct. The Committee determined to recommend to
Council that Mr. Penman be prosecuted before the Scottish Solicitors
Discipline Tribunal in relation to the professional misconduct and the
service provided and any other matter which the Fiscal feels
appropriate.”
The actions of Penman were so severe the Law Society’s reporter demanded Penman be prosecuted before the SCOTTISH SOLICITORS DISCIPLINE TRIBUNAL and struck off due
to the seriousness of his actions, however a secret deal was brokered
between a key Law Society official, James Ness and the then Complaints
Committee to commute Penman’s punishment and reverse the prosecution,
thought to be the first & only case of its kind ever happening at
the Law Society. The deal to reverse the prosecution was branded
“corrupt” by many legal insiders and the wider media.
No comments:
Post a Comment