Abuse survivors? group demands double-charging prosecutions

By Dan Buckley
SOLICITORS who inappropriately charged clients for work on abuse cases should be prosecuted, according to a British-based institutional survivors group.

Banks that facilitated the notorious double-charging of clients should also face the full force of the law, according to the London Irish Centre?s Survivors? Outreach Service.

?Banks have money laundering obligations and could be in trouble if they are found to have facilitated the proceeds of a crime,? said John Twomey, co-ordinator of the service.

?Banks that indiscriminately facilitated the movement of client monies by solicitors are very dangerously exposed,? said Mr Twomey.

The service has also sent a file to the Revenue Commissioners outlining alleged VAT offences against some solicitor firms who double-charged clients.

Mr Twomey added that the Law Society, which meets tomorrow to investigate complaints against solicitors, would be judged by actions not words. ?They have yet to adjudicate a single case and the robustness of their adjudication will be the test,? he said.

The Survivors? Service is demanding:

* The immediate return of money wrongfully appropriated, together with interest;

* The payment of appropriate compensation for the considerable distress and suffering caused to vulnerable clients by their members;

* Criminal prosecutions in cases where no valid client consent existed to the wrongful appropriation of money by their members;

* The expeditious reporting to the Revenue Commissioners of the apparently numerous cases where the appropriations involve VAT evasion.

But Felix O?Regan, of the Irish Banking Federation, said it was ?beyond the powers and beyond the scope? of any banking institution to investigate solicitors? money in such a manner and that current anti-money laundering guidelines did not require they do so.

He said banks had to satisfy themselves as to the bona fides of customers wishing to lodge money and satisfy themselves as to the source of the money.

?It?s another matter to act as inquisitor or moral guardian and ask if these people are entitled to the money they are lodging,? he said. ?

He said money payable to clients by solicitors was ?ring-fenced? and separate from their on-business money.

Law Society director general Ken Murphy said solicitors found guilty by the complaints committee would be required to repay improperly-charged fees with interest.

An investigating committee of the society is to order all solicitors against whom complaints have been made to appear before it to account for their actions.

The work of making representations before the Residential Institutions Redress Board has proved lucrative for law firms, with awards of up to ?300,000 and solicitors getting between 10% and 15% of each award.

While most firms were happy to receive the board?s scale of fees, some double-charged by billing the client as well.

One British-based claimant who was awarded ?120,000 was told to sign a document by her solicitor authorising the firm to take more than 11,000 of her award on top of the ?18,000 in fees allowed by the Redress Board. The firm originally sought over ?36,000 from the Board.

The firm then sent their client a cheque for her award, less a deduction for their fees. The claimant, a divorced mother on income support of less than stg?117 (?176) a week, returned the cheque, demanding the full amount.

The Redress Board paid ?9 million to solicitor firms in legal costs last year, or on average ?11,000 per application. The closing date for applications to the Board is December 15, 2005.