Disciplinary Record - Lindsey Amanda Pierce

Decision - Employee-related decision

Outcome: Control of non-qualified staff (Section 43 / Section 99 order)

Outcome date: 17 May 2019

Published date: 24 May 2019

Firm details

Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: RSA Law Limited

Address(es): Leonard House, Birkenhead, CH41 1FB

Firm ID: 617864

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

Regulatory Settlement Agreement

Reasons/basis

1. Agreed outcome

1.1 Lindsey Pierce, a former employee of Carpenters Limited (the firm), agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of her conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

1. to the SRA making an order under section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (a Section 43 Order) in relation to her, that, from the date of this agreement:
   1. no solicitor shall employ or remunerate her in connection with his practice as a solicitor
   2. no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate her in connection with the solicitor's practice
   3. no recognised body shall employ or remunerate her
   4. no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate her in connection with the business of that body
   5. no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit her to be a manager of the body
   6. no recognised body or manager or employee of such body shall permit her to have an interest in the body

except in accordance with the SRA's prior permission

2. she will pay the costs of the investigation of £300.

2. Summary of Facts

2.1 Ms Pierce was employed as a Legal Adviser by the firm. From 29 August 2017 to 9 August 2018, Ms Pierce was seconded to RSA Law Limited. She worked in fast-track personal injury work under the direction and supervision of a solicitor.

2.2 In June 2018 Ms Pierce was helping a friend with some aspects of a property transaction. As part of that, the friend needed to submit a form to the Land Registry, confirming their identity. The form needed to be signed by a solicitor.

2.3 Ms Pierce signed the form in the name of one of the solicitors at RSA Law. She did so without the knowledge or authority of that solicitor. Ms Pierce gave the form with the falsified signature to her friend to use in the transaction.

2.4 On 8 August 2018 Ms Pierce’s actions came to light when the other party to the property transaction queried the signature on the form. Ms Pierce accepted her wrong-doing and resigned from the firm on the following day.

3. Admissions

3.1 Ms Pierce admits, and the SRA accepts that her conduct set out above was dishonest.

4. Why the agreed outcome is appropriate

4.1 The SRA and Ms Pierce agree that a Section 43 Order is appropriate because:

1. Ms Pierce is not a solicitor
2. by working under the direction and supervision of a solicitor Ms Pierce was involved in a legal practice
3. by falsifying the solicitor’s signature on the Land Registry form, Ms Pierce has occasioned or been party to an act or default in relation to a legal practice. Ms Pierce's conduct in relation to that act or default makes it undesirable for her to be involved in a legal practice

4.2 Ms Pierce's conduct makes it undesirable for her to be involved in a legal practice because it was dishonest and had the potential to mislead others.

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

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

5.1 Ms Pierce agrees that she will not act in any way which is inconsistent with this agreement such as, for example, by denying responsibility for the conduct referred to above.

6. Costs

6.1 Ms Pierce 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.