SDT strikes off former Ince partner over £3m expenses fraud

  • Print
  • Comments (23)

Readers' comments (23)

  • Just struck off...but Iyer fell on his sword and confessed everything in 2010, so why has it taken the SRA/SDT a year and a half to deal with this? Does the Law Soc really take this stuff seriously as the guardian of the profession? And what about Ince? Surely it ought to be robustly sanctioned as well for letting him get away with this as an exampe to other firms seeing as it is happening all the time these days.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • £2.8 million in fake disbursements not being noticed by Ince's accounts department. Whatever kind of scam it was there is no excuse for that by Ince. Don't they check anything there?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Interesting comment from Chris above about Mr Iyer being such an excellent litigator. My firm has been on the other side of Mr Iyer and you get a feel for whether someone is bent or not by their behaviour. Believe me, he was bent. But it doesn't surprise me at Ince & Co that this was not noticed.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why jeopardise a career over extra money when you could have worked for 20 or 30 years more at £400k a year? Why not instead form a business in your spare time if you need more money or whatever? Why need more money anyway?

    So he prepared about 400 fraudulent invoices? Surely that would be a lot more than anyone else so would stand out as unusual?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ince & Co has just been named as law firm of the year by Roll on Friday, the legal news site. I agree if assistants can easily claim 'extras' in expenses up to 55K pa and partners have open cheque books, sorry 'disbursement claims' running into millions. Where do I sign up. Aren't city law firm just great. Or maybe RoF has a better sense of humor than James Wilson, SP of Ince.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @anon 1.07 "why jeopardise your career when you could have worked for another 20 or 30 years more?" - I think you've answered your own question. Cash now is better than a promise for cash in the future.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Portrays an image that law firms aren't too bothered about disbursements.

    Cordery on Solicitors is worth a look, particularly in relation to liability for disbursements.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "Nathan Lyer (also known as Andrew)"

    Surely that should have set off alarm bells.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • the company i worked for in the eighties in London used Ince 7 Co all the time including substantial litigation matters.They were more than brilliant and this firm will more than just survive this setback. Within weeks ,all this will be history and there will be no loss of long term clients.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • EC3 - sounds as if Mr Iyer beat your firm good and proper on a case......ho hum!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (23)