Free SRA Complaint Template

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to report the conduct of the solicitor and/or firm identified below to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (the SRA). I am a former client of the solicitor and/or firm named below. I ask the SRA to assess this report against the SRA Principles and the SRA Code of Conduct under the SRA Standards and Regulations 2019 and to take such regulatory action as is appropriate.

This report concerns the solicitor and/or firm identified below, who are regulated by the SRA in England and Wales.

The conduct I am reporting is as follows:

I instructed Harwood Vance LLP and Mr Okonkwo to act on my purchase of 27 Saltburn Road, Leeds, completing in April 2025. The deposit of £18,500 was sent to the firm client account on 2 April 2025. After completion I asked for a completion statement and confirmation that the balance of my deposit (£3,200) would be returned. Over four months the firm gave inconsistent figures, failed to produce a client account ledger, and then said the money had been "applied to costs" without any bill being delivered. When I asked for the client account records, Mr Okonkwo stopped replying. I am concerned that client money has not been properly accounted for and that I have been misled about what happened to it.

I enclose or can provide the following in support of this report:

Enclosure 1: client care letter and estimate dated 11 March 2025. Enclosure 2: bank transfer confirmation for the £18,500 deposit (2 April 2025). Enclosure 3: completion statement (incomplete, no ledger). Enclosure 4: email chain March-July 2025 showing the inconsistent figures and the unanswered request for the client account ledger. Enclosure 5: my note of the telephone call of 21 July 2025.

Client money must be kept separate from the firm money, held in a client account, and returned promptly once there is no longer a proper reason to hold it. Misuse, an unexplained shortfall or a failure to account engages the SRA Accounts Rules together with Principle 2 (public trust and confidence). Allegations touching client money are treated with particular seriousness because they go to the integrity of the profession and the security of client funds.

How this applies to my case:
The firm received £18,500 of my money into its client account and has not accounted for the balance of £3,200. No bill was ever delivered, yet the firm says the balance was "applied to costs". The firm has not produced a client account ledger despite repeated requests, which prevents me (and would prevent the SRA) from tracing the money. On the facts I am aware of, this is a failure to keep client money separate and to account for it promptly once there was no longer a proper reason to hold it.

The SRA Principles require a solicitor and firm to act: (1) in a way that upholds the rule of law and the proper administration of justice; (2) in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors' profession and in legal services; (3) with independence; (4) with honesty; (5) with integrity; (6) in a way that encourages equality, diversity and inclusion; and (7) in the best interests of each client.

Principles I say are breached:
Principle 2 (public trust and confidence) and Principle 7 (best interests of each client), together with the SRA Accounts Rules requirement to hold client money in a client account and to return it promptly. If the explanation given to me was untrue, Principle 4 (honesty) and Principle 5 (integrity) are also engaged.

A failure to meet the SRA standards may be a serious breach either in isolation or because it forms a persistent or concerning pattern of behaviour. I ask the SRA to assess the seriousness on that basis.

The SRA regulates the conduct of solicitors in the public interest; the Legal Ombudsman resolves complaints about poor service (such as delay, poor communication or cost) once the firm's own complaints procedure under section 112 of the Legal Services Act 2007 has been used. The two bodies have different roles and routinely cross-refer.

This matter has both a conduct dimension (for the SRA) and a service dimension (for the Legal Ombudsman). I am pursuing the conduct elements with the SRA and the service elements with the Legal Ombudsman, and I ask each body to liaise with the other as necessary.

My position on the Legal Ombudsman:
The delay and poor communication are service failures that I am also raising with the firm under its complaints procedure, and will take to the Legal Ombudsman if not resolved. The unaccounted-for client money and the possibly untrue explanation are conduct matters that I am reporting to the SRA, because they go beyond poor service.

I consent to the SRA sharing this report with the Legal Ombudsman, and to the Legal Ombudsman sharing any related service complaint with the SRA, so that the conduct and service elements are dealt with by the correct body.

To assist the SRA's assessment, I set out a chronology, the retainer and billing position, the specific Code breaches relied on, and an index of the evidence.

(A) Chronology.
11 March 2025 — client care letter and costs estimate. 2 April 2025 — £18,500 deposit paid to the firm client account. Late April 2025 — completion. 6 May 2025 — first request for a completion statement and return of the £3,200 balance. May-July 2025 — three inconsistent figures given (£3,200, then £1,950, then "nil after costs"). 21 July 2025 — telephone call: told the balance had been "applied to costs"; no bill produced. 24 July 2025 — written request for the client account ledger; no reply since.

(B) Retainer and bills.
The retainer was the residential conveyancing purchase of 27 Saltburn Road. The estimate was £1,400 plus VAT and disbursements. No interim or final bill compliant with the firm's own client care letter has ever been delivered, yet the firm asserts costs have absorbed the £3,200 balance.

(C) Code breach mapping. I ask the SRA to consider the SRA Accounts Rules (client money to be held in a client account and returned promptly; proper records to be kept), and the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs in relation to acting honestly and accounting to the client, together with the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms for the firm's systems and supervision.

(D) Evidence index.
E1 client care letter; E2 deposit transfer confirmation; E3 incomplete completion statement; E4 email chain March-July 2025; E5 my call note 21 July 2025; E6 my unanswered ledger request 24 July 2025.

Where a serious-breach threshold is met, the SRA may impose a written rebuke, a financial penalty, conditions on practice or control of the practice; and it may refer the most serious cases to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (constituted under section 46 of the Solicitors Act 1974). The Tribunal's sanctions range from no order, a reprimand and an unlimited fine to restriction, suspension and strike-off. For proven dishonesty the Tribunal will almost invariably strike the solicitor off — Bolton v Law Society [1994] 1 WLR 512.

Why this meets the serious-breach threshold:
Unaccounted-for client money and an explanation that may be untrue are at the most serious end of the SRA's enforcement spectrum. The conduct is not a one-off slip: it has continued over four months and the firm has refused to produce the records that would resolve it. If the money cannot be accounted for, the threshold for referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal is, in my submission, met.

On this report, I ask the SRA to refer the matter to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal under section 47 of the Solicitors Act 1974 if the serious-breach threshold is met.

Avoiding double jeopardy. Professional disciplinary proceedings are civil in nature and the principle of res judicata applies to them — R (Coke-Wallis) v ICAEW [2011] UKSC 1: a final decision on the merits on the same underlying conduct bars a second complaint. So far as I am aware, no disciplinary tribunal has previously determined a complaint about this matter, so res judicata does not arise. This is the first time the conduct has been reported.

I ask the SRA to: (a) acknowledge this report; (b) assess the conduct against the SRA Code of Conduct and the SRA Principles; (c) investigate where the serious-breach threshold is met; (d) keep me informed of the outcome so far as the SRA's rules allow; and (e) tell me if any part of this report should instead be directed to the Legal Ombudsman or another regulator.

The best way to contact me is at the address or email address at the head of this letter. I understand that the SRA will process the personal data in this report in accordance with the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 for its regulatory functions, and that it may need to share relevant parts of this report with the solicitor or firm to investigate it.

YOURS FAITHFULLY,