Bailey Nicholson Grayson, Woodford Green Reviews & Information

Home > UK Solicitor > Woodford Green > Bailey Nicholson Grayson

Add review

Not yet rated

0 review(s) removed
Why are reviews removed?


How to find us

Unit 1b Bourne Court, Unity Trading Estate, Southend Road, Woodford Green, Essex, IG8 8HD

Other branches

Mobile phone icon0208 418 2900Email iconEmail
Laptop iconWebsite

Facilities Office accepts Legal Aid

Languages spoken English, French, Hindi, Punjabi, Spanish, Urdu 
Size of firm 6 solicitors


Are you this solicitor?    
Contact us to take control of your listing or to request any edits to your information

All content on solicitor.info is viewed and used at your own risk and we do not warrant the accuracy or reliability of any of the information.


Reviews

Add review

Summary

5 stars   0
4 stars   0
3 stars   0
2 stars   0
1 stars   0

Legal services at this branch

  • Advocacy
  • Crime - fraud
  • Crime - general
  • Family - general
  • Immigration - asylum
  • Private client - Probate
  • Private client - Wills


Add review

Filter Reviews

 


Compiled from data from the Solicitors Regulation Authority website

23/10/18

Source: https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/429259.article?Decision=2018-10-23

Outcome: Regulatory settlement agreement
Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details



Regulatory Settlement Agreement

?



Reasons/basis

Agreed outcome

1.1 Ms Amee Patel, a solicitor at Bailey Nicholson Grayson, agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of her conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):



she is rebuked

to the publication of this agreement

she will pay the costs of the investigation of ?300.



2. Admissions

2.1 Ms Patel makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:



that on 6 September 2017, by responding to messages received electronically (via WhatsApp), from an individual who she knew to be in prison, without authority, she breached Principle 6 of the SRA Principles 2011.



3. Why the agreed outcome is appropriate

3.1 The SRA considers that the agreed outcome is appropriate because the conditions in rule 3.1 of the SRA Disciplinary Rules 2011 are met, in that:



the agreed outcome is a proportionate outcome in the public interest

the conduct was neither trivial nor justifiably inadvertent

Ms Patel notified the SRA of the incident and there is no pattern of similar behaviour.



3.2 The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process.

4. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement

4.1 Ms Patel agrees that she will not act in any way which is inconsistent with this agreement such as, for example, by denying the admissions made in this agreement.

4.2 If Ms Patel acts in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be considered further by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary outcome or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of Principles 2, 6 and 7 of the SRA Principles 2011.

5. Costs

5.1 Ms Patel agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of ?300. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 0   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Compiled from data from the Solicitors Regulation Authority website

23/10/18

Source: https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/429259.article?Decision=2018-10-23

Outcome: Regulatory settlement agreement
This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details
Regulatory Settlement Agreement

Reasons/basis
Agreed outcome
1.1 Ms Amee Patel, a solicitor at Bailey Nicholson Grayson, agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of her conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

she is rebuked
to the publication of this agreement
she will pay the costs of the investigation of ?300.
2. Admissions
2.1 Ms Patel makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:

that on 6 September 2017, by responding to messages received electronically (via WhatsApp), from an individual who she knew to be in prison, without authority, she breached Principle 6 of the SRA Principles 2011.
3. Why the agreed outcome is appropriate
3.1 The SRA considers that the agreed outcome is appropriate because the conditions in rule 3.1 of the SRA Disciplinary Rules 2011 are met, in that:

the agreed outcome is a proportionate outcome in the public interest
the conduct was neither trivial nor justifiably inadvertent
Ms Patel notified the SRA of the incident and there is no pattern of similar behaviour.
3.2 The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process.

4. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement
4.1 Ms Patel agrees that she will not act in any way which is inconsistent with this agreement such as, for example, by denying the admissions made in this agreement.

4.2 If Ms Patel acts in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be considered further by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary outcome or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of Principles 2, 6 and 7 of the SRA Principles 2011.

5. Costs
5.1 Ms Patel agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of ?300. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 0   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Subscribe to updates

Complete the form below to be notified of new reviews or responses added for this solicitor.


terms of use

Enter this code » Verify

Related links

About us
Legal info
For Solicitors
FAQ
20223 solicitor reviews

3,276,185 page views