Solicitor Struck Off Following Legal Aid Agency Audit and SRA Investigation

A law firm owner described as “manifestly incompetent” has been struck off after making false claims to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) and maintaining chaotic firm accounts following a legal aid agency audit and disciplinary proceedings.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) stated that Betty Igwebike Forde operated with “total disregard” for the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) accounts rules.

Ms. Forde, who qualified as a Solicitor in 2013, was the sole practitioner at Anchor Legal, an East London law firm she ran from December 2018 until the SRA intervened and shut it down in July 2023. She was responsible for all compliance roles at the firm.

The SRA’s intervention followed a referral from the LAA, which had terminated Anchor Legal’s mental health contract due to concerns over the quality of work and claims for services with no supporting evidence.

The SDT proceedings were conducted in Ms. Forde’s absence, as she failed to engage with the process. During a legal aid aid agency audit, the LAA found insufficient evidence in five sampled files to support claims for services purportedly delivered. This finding was backed by attendance records from West London NHS Trust.

Although Ms. Forde offered to repay the identified sums and acknowledged some shortcomings, she attributed the issues to a supervisor she had employed to oversee the mental health contract. However, the SDT rejected this explanation, stating that as the only individual authorised to submit claims to the LAA, she bore full responsibility for ensuring their validity.

The tribunal highlighted that Ms. Forde had worked as a fee-earner on at least two reviewed files, meaning she should have reviewed the records if she had not conducted the visits. A proper review would have revealed inaccuracies in the claims.

Serious breaches of the account’s rules were also uncovered, including the mixing of client and office funds, failure to maintain a central record of bills, and improper handling of client payments. In some cases, funds owed to clients were recorded as “disbursements” and transferred to the office account without being properly paid to clients.

In several personal injury cases, clients did not receive the amounts they were owed. The SDT deemed these failures “blatant and egregious,” reflecting Ms. Forde’s “manifest incompetence” and disregard for regulatory requirements.

The tribunal ordered her to be struck off the roll of Solicitors and pay the SRA’s costs of £65,000, noting that her uncooperative behaviour had significantly increased these expenses.

Compliance in Claiming Legal Aid Costs

These disciplinary proceedings reinforce that law firm owners are ultimately responsible for the accuracy and compliance of all claims submitted on behalf of their firms.  This was already shown to be the case in inter-partes detailed costs assessments, particularly given that it is a regulated individual that is required to sign off the accuracy of any Bill of Costs.  The same principle applies to legal aid claims, and it is not a plausible excuse to deny knowledge or awareness of any false representations made in any pleadings/costs claims on behalf of a legal practice. This extends to ensuring that all claims for costs are justified, appropriately documented, and submitted according to the rules. Even if staff or external providers handle aspects of the work, the owner or manager is accountable for the firm’s overall compliance.

What is a Legal Aid Agency Audit?

As part of a law firm’s contract with the Legal Aid Agency, the LAA are entitled to audit aspects with regards to compliance with the contract.  Non-compliance with legal aid regulations, policies, and contractual obligations can trigger a Legal Aid Agency audit, or they can be completely random. This is in order to identify any potential risks of misuse, overpayment, or breach of contractual terms.

With regards to legal costs, LAA audits can take the form of random file checks, whereby on CCMS a file uploaded for processing may have a bespoke request for the full file of papers to be uploaded for a certain time range, or the LAA may wish to do a thorough review of a number of cases at once.  Increased numbers of rejections on CCMS can increase scrutiny of your legal aid costs claims, and increase the frequency of random file audits.

How Can a Costs Draftsman or Costs Lawyer Assist with an Audit?

Costs Draftsmen and Costs Lawyers play a critical role in ensuring compliance with legal aid regulations and can significantly reduce the likelihood of a Legal Aid Agency audit by meticulously preparing and managing claims.  LAA audits will however, arise on specific costs files irrespective on random occasions, and it is imperative that your costs claim stands up to scrutiny.  If it is found there is any aspect of non-compliance, the LAA are likely to expand their audit further and wider in scope.

At ARC Costs, our costs draftsmen specialise in preparing detailed and accurate costs claims for submission on CCMS, ensuring they meet the specific requirements of legal aid authorities. By ensuring claims are correctly presented and supported by evidence (e.g., time records, case notes), our costs team help mitigate risks of disputes or challenges during a legal aid agency audit or reviews by the funding authority.  It is our experience at ARC Costs that when a file is costed properly and supported with proper evidence, it is more common than not for LAA costs claims to be recovered at 100% of the claimed amount.

How can ARC Costs Assist?

Our team of experienced law costs draftsmen and Costs Lawyers at ARC Costs regularly assist in all types of costs claims, including legal aid costs. We work with both professionals in various different law firms, including Heads of Department, Directors, Solicitors/CILEX as well as Paralegals and internal costs teams, to maximise costs recovery from the LAA in a compliant fashion.

Through our specialised cost assessment service, we assist clients in optimising their reclaimed legal expenses, all the while delivering proficient legal guidance and lessening the possibility of rejections.

We frequently employ the CCMS system for the submission of legal aid cost claims and manage all related administrative tasks on behalf of our clients. This approach not only releases fee earners from administrative burdens but also guarantees the swift and effective retrieval of highest potential legal aid fees.

To find out more about how we can provide you with assistance, please get in touch with us at 01204 397302 or email our team of experts at info@arccosts.co.uk. Alternatively, please use our free chat facility to speak to an expert directly.

Follow Us