Solicitor struck off for failing to protect vulnerable Harrogate homeowner

A solicitor has been struck off for a year after failing to protect a vulnerable client from a conman who bought his Harrogate home.

Anthony Gale was employed by Ison Harrison solicitors when he acted for both the buyer and the seller of a property on St George’s Road.

The solicitor had a long-standing professional relationship with the buyer, Sukhdev Singh, who acquired the property by telling the seller he had paid off the outstanding mortgage of just under £120,000. However, there was no evidence of any mortgage having existed or any money having been paid for the home, the tribunal heard.

Singh acquired the home through a company he had set up, before renting it back to the vulnerable man, who had no tenancy agreement to protect him. Singh was jailed earlier this year for four counts of fraud, all relating to the same property and its former owner.

A hearing of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal last month found the seller, known as Client A, was autistic and had an estimated mental age of 12 years and four months. Mr Gale said he did not realise this when he was dealing with the sale.

A report from the tribunal, published last week, said:

“The admitted misconduct represented a grave departure [from] the ‘complete integrity, probity and trustworthiness’ expected of a solicitor.

“The harm Mr Gale caused to the solicitors’ profession was extensive. The harm caused both to those directly involved and to the profession was eminently foreseeable.”

The three members of the tribunal panel said Mr Gale’s misconduct was “deliberate, calculated and repeated”, and led to a vulnerable client being taken advantage of in the transaction, which took place in 2016.

Mr Gale also faced an allegation that, in 2020 when he was employed by Lofthouse & Co, he acted without authorisation in another property sale and signed a contract without instruction.

Read more:

The hearing last month heard that he had been before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal before, in 2018, relating to allegations about his conduct on five other conveyancing matters, between 2005 and 2014. While he denied all five charges, the tribunal found the majority of them proved and he was ordered to pay a fine of £10,000 and costs of £28,291.

He also had sanctions imposed on his practice, including preventing him from being the sole practitioner or owner of a law firm.

The report from last month’s hearing into the latest allegations said:

“Mr Gale’s repeated misconduct demonstrated his complete lack of insight into and understanding of his failings.

“The tribunal held serious concerns as to the risk of repetition in the future given Mr Gale’s demonstrable propensity to ignore red flags in conveyancing transactions, and his inherent inability to identify and heed warning signs of fraud or exploitation.”

‘Blind spot’

The tribunal heard that while the Solicitors Regulation Authority, which brought the application to have him struck off, had been investigating Mr Gale, he had denied all the allegations against him.

However, he admitted them shortly before the hearing, in August this year. The tribunal report said:

“It was plain to the tribunal that Mr Gale had a complete blind spot with regard to the obligations to ‘know your client’, the risks of fraud in conveyancing transactions, management of conflicts of interest, and the obligations attendant upon accepting instructions from vulnerable clients.

“The previous sanction imposed in 2018 had not rectified Mr Gale’s ineptitude in those respects, and had not protected either the public or the reputation of the profession from repeated harm.”

Mr Gale was ordered to pay costs of £12,000 and was suspended from practising for a year.

After that date, he will face restrictions on his work including being barred from running his own business, being a partner in a business, or taking on a role where he is responsible for legal practice or finance and administration.

He is also prevented from holding clients’ money and being a signatory on a client account.

In order to work as a solicitor, he will have to seek approval from the SRA, and will have to complete further training in four areas of practice, including working with vulnerable clients and understanding the risks of fraud.

Former Harrogate nurse struck off over 19 misconduct charges

A community psychiatric nurse who was based in Harrogate has been struck off after facing a series of charges of misconduct.

Gordon Eric Finlay was found to have failed to keep accurate records for patients in his care, or to maintain professional boundaries, when he worked for the Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust, covering the Harrogate area in 2017.

He was also found to have acted inappropriately with colleagues, including sexually inappropriate behaviour, when working for Bradford District Care NHS Foundation Trust in 2019.

In a nine-day hearing last month, the Nursing and Midwifery Council heard evidence from multiple witnesses in relation to 19 charges. A report from the hearing said:

“It came to light that that Mr Finlay had communicated with a vulnerable mental health patient (Patient A) by telephone and a number of text messages which contained inappropriate content after the patient ceased to be under his care.

“Further regulatory concerns identified from this referral relate to a failure to preserve patient safety, in that Mr Finlay failed to escalate Patient A’s care when Patient A had disclosed a decline in mood and increased thoughts of suicide in a number of text messages to Mr Finlay. Patient A committed suicide during this period of communication.”

The three-person panel also heard he had signed off text messages to Patient A with “Gx”. The report said she had “severe and enduring” mental health problems, “particularly in relation to building trust and maintaining relationships”, and was “particularly vulnerable to any blurred… lines of professional communication”.

Mr Finlay, who was not present or represented at the hearing, was found to have failed to share Patient A’s deteriorating mental health with colleagues not through a genuine mistake, but in order to protect his job.

Relating to other charges of failing to keep accurate records for his patients in both Harrogate and Bradford, the report said:

“The panel considered the written representations of Mr Finlay, in particular, his admission that he was unfamiliar and not comfortable with the electronic diary and therefore recorded appointments in his paper diary.

“The panel was of the view that Mr Finlay would have had sufficient time to learn and use the electronic diary system over the approximate four-month period that was affected and he should have escalated any concerns or issues that he believed were preventing him from completing his patient records as required.”

The NMC panel also heard Mr Finlay’s line manager had offered him additional support with his record-keeping, but this had not been taken up.

Read more:

Mr Finlay was also accused of hugging and kissing a colleague on the cheek, as well as touching another colleague’s bottom, and making sexual comments in his workplace as well as showing an inappropriate video to colleagues.

In a written response to the charge of the hug and kiss, he said:

“It felt like a normal thing to do around someone’s birthday and I didn’t give it much thought, it was innocent and I would stress this hopefully reinforced by the CCTV footage that it was non-sexual and did not appear to create a reaction.”

The panel found the kiss and the hug was not sexual in nature, but that touching the other colleague’s bottom was.

It also found the latter – against a colleague described as “a junior colleague and a young and inexperienced person in the workplace” – amounted to bullying and harassment. The other sexual behaviours were found not to be bullying.

‘Undermine public confidence’

Addressing all charges, the panel found Mr Finlay’s conduct had fallen “seriously short” of the standards expected of a nurse and amounted to misconduct. Its report said:

“In considering whether the conduct has been remediated, the panel acknowledged that Mr Finlay cooperated in the local investigation and made admissions to some of the charges.

“He has also engaged with the NMC process and provided detailed written information by way of reflection and further information, although he did not attend the hearing.

“The panel acknowledged Mr Finlay had developed a health issue over the course of these events relating to depression and anxiety. The panel also acknowledged that both Mr Finlay and the rest of the mental health team in the area were under considerable work pressure.”

The report said there were 315 patient contacts which had not been recorded by Mr Finlay and that he had shown “no insight into the impact of his failures… on wider patient care or upon his colleagues”.

It said Mr Finlay’s written submissions had shown he felt he was “prioritising patient care”. However, the panel said having had the matter addressed by one NHS trust, he still failed to keep accurate records when he moved to a new trust.

The report concluded:

“Mr Finlay’s actions were significant departures from the standards expected of a registered nurse, and are fundamentally incompatible with him remaining on the register.

“The panel was of the view that the findings in this particular case demonstrate that Mr Finlay’s actions were serious and to allow him to continue practising would undermine public confidence in the profession and in the NMC as a regulatory body.”

As a result of the panel’s findings, Mr Finlay was struck off the nursing register.