* JOHN BERNARD HURST, 50, admitted 1976, practised as John B Hurst, Hove, Sussex, struck off and ordered to pay u779 costs. Tribunal told he had been given a suspended 12-month jail sentence at Norwich Crown Court on October 29, 1992, after conviction on two counts of aiding and abetting the fraudulent disposal of a property by a bankrupt and one of aiding and abetting a bankrupt to obtain credit. Offences said to have involved a loan of u24,000 to a bankrupt and fraudulent disposal of property and money in excess of u33,000. Matters arose while he was acting for client who was an undischarged bankrupt and had involved the client, with Hurst's knowledge, using a false name. Hurst admitted the allegations and said he would be prepared to remove himself from the roll voluntarily. He said offences related to period when he was a licensed conveyancer and stressed that no one had suffered financial loss as a result of what happened. Tribunal said Hurst had been suspended in 1989 and fined u1,000 by it in 1990. It considered his attitude was wholly inappropriate as a solicitor and officer of the court.
* WILLIAM NEIL ANDERSON, 48, admitted 1947, practised in partnership as Tarlings, Cheltenham, fined u1,000 and ordered to pay u886 costs. Allegations substantiated he failed to reply to correspondence from Solicitors Complaints Bureau. Tribunal told that following complaint to the bureau it wrote seeking his observations. He had answered some letters but failed to reply to others. In his submissions to tribunal Anderson apologised and said papers he had held relating to the subject of the complaint had now been forwarded and should enable the matter to be satisfactorily resolved. Tribunal said it took a serious view of solicitors who did not reply promptly and fully to all letters addressed to them by their own professional body.
* GAVIN GEORGE LUCAS, admitted 1973, practised as GG Lucas & Co, Long Eaton, Nottingham, fined u1,000 and ordered to pay costs of u1,1750. Allegations substantiated he failed to keep books properly, wrongly drew client money and delivered accountants reports late. Tribunal told Law Society Investigation accountants probe into Lucas's books revealed minimum shortage of client funds of u3,502 in December 1992 but there had been no question of dishonesty and no claims against compensation fund. Tribunal said Lucas found himself before the tribunal as a result of a combination of unfortunate factors over which he had little control. These had included health problems as far as his wife, his son and he himself had been concerned. They said he had hitherto had an exemplary career and was now functioning as a useful member of the profession.