2 reviews and information for Sweeney Miller LLP, Sunderland

Home > UK Solicitor > Sunderland > Sweeney Miller LLP

How to find us

Mowbray Villas, Mowbray Road, Sunderland, Tyne and Wear, SR2 7EA

Other branches


Languages spoken English, French 
Size of firm 4 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

  • Aviation
  • Children
  • Commercial litigation
  • Commercial property
  • Company and commercial
  • Conveyancing - residential
  • Crime - fraud
  • Employment
  • Family - general
  • Insolvency and restructuring - business
  • Landlord and tenant - residential
  • Litigation - general
  • Mergers and acquisitions
  • Personal injury
  • Private client - Probate
  • Private client - trusts
  • Private client - Wills
  • Tax


Add review

Filter Reviews

 


Compiled from data from the Solicitors Regulation Authority website

31/10/17

Source: https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/638170.article?Decision=2017-10-31

Outcome: Approval of employment (section 43)
This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details
Sweeney Miller LLP has been granted permission to employ Mr Tinkler as a residential conveyancing paralegal subject to the following conditions:

Mr Tinkler's work must be directly supervised and reviewed on a daily basis by either Paul Miller or Mrs Vedhara. The manner of supervision must accord with that detailed by the firm in its application.
If both Mr Miller and Mrs Vedhara are absent from the office for a whole day or more, then Mr Tinkler must not have access to any of the firm's offices and must not carry out any work.
Mr Tinkler must only work in the conveyancing department of Sweeney Miller LLP. He may work at either the firm's head office in Sunderland or at its branch office in Newcastle Upon Tyne.
Mr Tinkler will not supervise any member of staff.
Mr Tinkler will not handle office or client money or be a signatory to the firm's client or office account.
This approval is given on the basis of the job description outlined in the firm's application of 19 August 2017, and his role and responsibilities and the supervision arrangements provided by the firm. These may not be varied without the SRA's prior written approval.
This approval and its conditions are reviewable at the discretion of the SRA.
Reasons/basis
On 22 August 2017, Liam Tinkler entered into a regulatory settlement agreement (RSA) with the SRA in relation to his conduct while employed as a legal clerk by Winn Solicitors Limited. In the RSA, Mr Tinkler admitted the following misconduct:

He misled the Court by sending it a backdated letter which gave the impression that he had complied with the Court's deadline of 20 August 2015 when he had not.
His conduct in this regard was dishonest and breached Principles 1, 2 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011 and failed to achieve outcome 5.1 of the SRA Code of Conduct 2011.
Mr Tinkler and the SRA agreed in the RSA that his conduct warranted the following:

The making of an order pursuant to section 43(2) of the Solicitor's Act 1974. This order prevents Mr Tinkler from being involved in a legal practice in all of the ways mentioned in this section without the SRA's prior approval.
A rebuke and a ?2,000 financial penalty.

Was this review helpful?  
Thumbs up 0   Thumbs down 0

Respond   Report abuse

Compiled from data from the Solicitors Regulation Authority website

22/08/17

Source: https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check/638170.article?Decision=2017-10-31

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

Decision details
Agreed outcome
1.1. Liam David Tinkler was a legal clerk employed by Winn Solicitors Limited of Newcastle Upon Tyne (the Firm). Mr Tinkler agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of his conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

(a) to the SRA making an order under section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (a Section 43 Order) in relation to Mr Tinkler that, from the date of this agreement:
(i) no solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with his practice as a solicitor
(ii) no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the solicitor's practice
(iii) no recognised body shall employ or remunerate him
(iv) no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the business of that body
(v) no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to be a manager of the body
(vi) no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to have an interest in the body
except in accordance with the SRA's prior permission.
(b) he is rebuked
(c) he is fined ?2,000
(d) to the publication of this agreement
(e) he will pay the costs of the investigation of ?600.
Reasons/basis
Summary of Facts
2.1. Mr Tinkler was employed by the Firm from 5 November 2013.

2.2. The Firm were instructed to pursue a claim for personal injuries. Mr Tinkler was the fee earner dealing with the matter. Proceedings were issued at Gateshead County Court.

2.3. On 1 June 2015, the Court ordered that the claim be stayed until 3 September 2015 to allow the parties time to attempt to settle matters. The Court further ordered that on or before 20 August 2015 the Claimant must either notify them that the claim had been settled or request a further extension of the stay period.

2.4. Mr Tinkler missed the Court's deadline of 20 August 2015. On 24 August 2015 he created and sent to the Court a letter backdated to 20 August 2015.

2.5. Mr Tinkler's backdating of the letter to the Court was discovered when the file was transferred to another fee earner on 2 November 2016. The firm investigated the matter. Mr Tinkler accepted he had backdated a letter to the Court and he was dismissed by the firm on 17 November 2016.

2.6. The firm reported the matter to the SRA on 20 December 2016.

Admissions
3.1. Mr Tinkler makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:

(a) He misled the Court by sending them a backdated letter which gave the impression he had complied with the deadline contained in the Court Order of 4 June 2015 when he had not. By doing so, he:
(i) breached Principles 1, 2 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011; and
(ii) failed to comply with Outcome 5.1 of the SRA Code of Conduct 2011.
(b) That by creating and sending the backdated letter to the Court he was dishonest.

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
22294 solicitor reviews

3,669,661 page views