AC-2024-LON-000040 - [2025] EWHC 1965 (Admin)

Mr Cottam was admitted to the Roll of Solicitors on 15 August 1991. In 1996, he set up a sole practice named Cottams Solicitors. In 2008, the practice was incorporated as Cottams Solicitors Limited (‘the Firm’) and functioned out of a freehold premises, purchased with a mortgage. The Firm remained a small concern and consisted of Mr Cottam, a cashier and a conveyancer. At the relevant time, Mr Cottam was the sole director, manager and company secretary of the Firm. Mr Cottam also held compliance roles at the Firm as the compliance officer for legal practice (‘COLP’) and compliance officer for finance and administration (‘COFA’).

In his evidence to the SRA, Mr Cottam describes the Firm as generally successful in its first few years, in the sense that it remained financially profitable until July 2015. In July 2015, a fire occurred at the freehold premises in which the firm was based. It was believed that the fire was an act of arson, Mr Cottam having also received death threats proximate to the fire, although no one was identified as the suspected arsonist. Although the premises was insured, the cover was not sufficient to meet the losses resulting from the fire. As a result, the firm had to relocate to temporary premises, which incurred further expense. Mr Cottam states that these series of unfortunate events marked the start of the decline in the success of the Firm and in his mental health.

Within the foregoing context, and up until the SRA investigation that commenced on 1 October 2018 and which led to the findings made by the Tribunal in October 2023, Mr Cottam had an unblemished career with no previous formal disciplinary matters.

On 1 October 2018, the SRA commenced a without notice forensic inspection of the Firm following receipt of complaints relating to the handling of client money. The inspection was conducted by Mr Cassini, a Forensic Investigation Officer. Mr Cottam was interviewed on 2 October 2018. Mr Cassini reviewed the Firm’s client account reconciliation as at 31 August 2018, which revealed a client account shortage. The client leger on one matter showed debit balances as a result of transfers from the client account to the office account for purported costs. An Interim Forensic Investigation Report, dated 10 October 2018, identified a cash shortage on the client account of £137,388.12, in relation to improper transfers in the matter of ‘RCG’, of which £804.20 had been repaid at the date of the interim report.

Following the Interim Investigation Report, the Firm was intervened in by the SRA on 16 October 2018. At the relevant time, Mr Cottam held a practicing certificate free from conditions. His practicing certificate was suspended on 18 October 2018. A Final Forensic Investigation Report was produced, dated 13 March 2019. This report identified that on a further matter, ‘JB’, transfers had been made from the client account to the office account. The ‘JB’ file did not contain copies of bills or written notification of costs sent to the client relating to the transfers and there appeared to be no evidence on the client file of the work undertaken in relation to the transfers. There were, however, invoices on the ‘JB’ file, which did not appear to have been sent to the client, and did not reflect any work undertaken. The total value of those client account transfers was £37,727.32. The total value of the improper transfers across the two client mattes of ‘RCG’ and ‘JB’ was therefore £175,115.44.

As I have noted, the matter came before the Tribunal between 24 and 26 October 2023. The Tribunal considered the documentary evidence before it and heard oral evidence from Mr Cassini and from Mr Cottam. In circumstances where each party was represented by counsel, the Tribunal heard both Mr Cassini and Mr Cottam challenged by way of cross-examination. The Tribunal provided their written decision for the order of 26 October 2023 to the parties on 14 November 2023.

Prior to undertaking an analysis of the evidence read and heard by the Tribunal, the Tribunal noted as follows with respect to the manner in which it had approached that evidence:

“[31] The written and oral evidence of witnesses is quoted or summarised in the Findings of Fact and Law below. The evidence referred to will be that which was relevant to the findings of the Tribunal, and to the facts or issues in dispute between the parties. For the avoidance of doubt, the Tribunal read all of the documents in the case and made notes of the oral evidence of all witnesses. The absence of any reference to particular evidence should not be taken as an indication that the Tribunal did not read, hear or consider that evidence.”