Ashurst Perkins Coie Lawyer Struck Off Over Stolen Bike Insurance Claim

• Kieran Ferguson, a junior lawyer at Ashurst Perkins Coie, was struck off the roll for attempting to claim for a stolen bike not covered by his insurance policy.
• The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found that Ferguson's conduct was dishonest and lacking in integrity, undermining public trust in the profession.
• Ferguson made misleading statements throughout the investigation, including initially denying any dishonesty and later attempting to withdraw the claim.
• He was ordered to pay the SRA's costs of £20,757 and faces severe consequences for his actions.

The tribunal found that Ferguson's decision to amend the policy was 'compelling evidence' that he knew the Topstone was not covered at the time of the theft.

Kieran Ferguson, a junior lawyer at Ashurst Perkins Coie, was recently struck off the roll after attempting to claim for a stolen bike that was not covered by his insurance policy. The incident raises questions about the importance of thoroughly reviewing insurance policies and ensuring accuracy in claims. According to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), Ferguson's insurance policy specifically listed a Cannondale Systemsix as the insured bike, with an insured value of £2,500. However, when he submitted his claim for the stolen Topstone, worth around £1,699, he added it to his policy shortly afterwards, despite initially denying any dishonesty in his actions. The tribunal found that Ferguson's decision to amend the policy was 'compelling evidence' that he knew the Topstone was not covered at the time of the theft.

An investigation into Ferguson's claim revealed a series of misleading statements, including his initial claim for the stolen bike and subsequent attempts to withdraw the claim. The tribunal found both allegations against him proven and concluded that his conduct was dishonest, lacking integrity, and undermining public trust in the profession. Despite mitigation arguments presented by Ferguson's legal team, the tribunal rejected the suggestion that this case involved a momentary lapse or exceptional circumstances warranting leniency. Instead, they noted that Ferguson had opportunities to correct his statements but continued with the claim, making further misleading statements. The tribunal concluded that Ferguson was not inherently dishonest but that his actions demonstrated a pattern of dishonesty rather than an isolated incident.

Ferguson's actions have resulted in severe consequences, including being struck off the roll and ordered to pay the SRA's costs of £20,757. The case serves as a reminder to lawyers and compliance officers about the importance of accuracy and transparency in claims. It highlights the need for thorough reviews of insurance policies and ensures that all information provided is accurate. This case also underscores the significance of maintaining public trust in the legal profession, which can be compromised by dishonesty and misleading statements.

Lawyers and compliance officers should be aware that making false or misleading claims to insurers can have severe consequences, including being struck off the roll. This case highlights the importance of thoroughly reviewing insurance policies and ensuring that all information provided is accurate.

Source: Original reporting via Legal Cheek