Partner stuck off and fined thousands for 12 years of misconduct
A PARTNER in a Rotherham law firm whose actions led to the dissolution of his firm has been struck off and fined £32,763.
At a hearing on 27 September 2016, Charles Edward Robert Christian Rhodes, appeared in person and was not represented as the tribunal heard evidence on the former partner at Gichard & Co and his misconudct over a 12-year period.
As part of a long list of allegations, the committee heard that between 5 March 2002 and 4 August 2011, Rhodes misappropriated client funds (of a Mr BD, deceased) to the tune of £266,875, overcharging for the execution of a will.
It said he caused the firm of Gichard & Co to provide false documents – one which was reported to be a client ledger in relation to the same client, Mr BD, and another, from July 2013, which were falsified bills for his work on the deceased client’s will.
Between 2007 and 2015 in three instances in relation to two clients, including Mr BD, Rhodes reportedly claimed costs for work of a total of £104,865.15
Up until 16 June 2011 Rhodes was partner in Gichard & Co, a specialist conveyancing law firm. It forced to close down in March 2015 after Rhodes and another employee, Jeremy Clive Copestake, caused the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority to suspect dishonesty.
Rhodes’ actions came to light in April 2012. The grandson of the first deceased client, of whose will Rhodes and the law firm were executors, instructed another law firm to look into matters relating to the administration of the estate.
Following their investigation, a report was made to the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority in April 2014.
Rhodes reportedly told the tribunal that he felt it was important he attend in person and not shirk his responsibilities, but he denied that he had misappropriated client funds.
When confronted by the court, he accepted that taking three times as much as was owed to him when he overcharged for the execution of Mr BD’s will did appear to be dishonest. Similarly he was forced to accept that the production of 17 fake bills was not the actions of an honest man.
Rhodes said he was acting on “autopilot” as he had been under considerable pressure relating to his personal life and health.
In attempts to repay the estate of the first client, he had been trying to sell his firm’s offices to raise money.
It said his motivations were unclear, but that the length of the misconduct, which happened over a total of 12 years merited Rhodes to be struck off and fined £32,763.
