Call us today0800 160 1298

Advantage Litigation

Welcome to Advantage Litigation Services. We provide affordable access to commercial litigation.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

Law Firm Bosses Fined Over Property Development Fiasco

Posted by on in Uncategorized
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 671
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has fined two directors £17,500 each based on their role in a failed apartment development scheme.

The two directors, Siu Yung Alan Ma and Daniel Chung, were formerly directors of law firm Maxwell Alves. The London-based firm, which is no longer trading, was acting for clients looking to invest in an off-plan property development scheme. In a little over 12 months, Maxwell Alves acted on behalf of 42 investors, eventually handling £3.6m in deposits and receiving £35,000 in respect of costs payments. At the tribunal hearing, it was revealed that 40% of the monies received were spent on ‘sales and marketing commissions’.

Lack of Experience

It was also revealed that Cheung sent so-called ‘frustration letters’ to clients, threatening them with legal proceedings if they brought a complaint to the Legal Ombudsman. He admitted to having sent the letters, even though he knew they were threatening in tone, but claimed that he had subsequently and promptly taken legal advice and sent additional letters to put remedy the situation. The tribunal acknowledged his sincerity on this point, saying Cheung found himself out of his depth in a difficult situation.

The two solicitors argued that they were also victims, saying that they were also deceived by the developer as the scheme had not been financially viable from the start. The tribunal concluded that Ma had failed ‘to go the extra mile’ for his clients and had missed the higher level view with regard to what was actually happening. The experienced solicitor had been taking Scottish law exams whilst also setting up an office in Hong Kong and ‘taken his eye off the ball and had abdicated his supervisory duties to staff who were less experienced’. Cheung, admitted in 2010, was found to lack the experience of his colleague, but he shared the responsibility of ensuring proper advice was given to clients. In addition to the £17,500 fines, each solicitor was also ordered to pay £22,000 in costs.

Funding Your Litigation Claim

If you are thinking about taking legal action against another individual or company but are confused about your funding options, Advantage Litigation Services can help. We can help you find the most cost effective solution for your circumstances. Click here to contact us today or call 0800 160 1298 to see how we can help you


Get in touch

  1. Your Name(*)
    Please let us know your name.
  2. Your Email(*)
    Please let us know your email address.
  3. Company Name(*)
    Please write a subject for your message.
  4. Your Phone Number
    Invalid Input
  5. Message(*)
    Please let us know your message.
  6. Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Invalid Input

Latest News

  • Tech giant YouTube is facing a group action claim in the UK over allegations that the Google-owned video sharing platform has violated various privacy and data protection laws. The class action claim, being brought by specialist non-profit international law Hausfeld and Foxglove, accuses YouTube of habitually breaching breaking European data protection laws by unlawfully targeting over four million under thirteen year-olds with addictive programming whilst also gathering their data for use in targeted advertisers. Read More

  • A large scale contract dispute claim has commenced involving a Hull based energy plant and one of its main contractors. The plant – Energy Works Hull – terminated the contract for MW High Tech Projects as they claim that the contractor had not met the agreed project completion date. Energy Works Hull are seeking £133m in damages to cover the cost of rectifying defects, delay damages and added costs to complete works. In response, MW High Tech Projects is disputing the claim and has subsequently filed a counterclaim for just under £47m, based on provisions they say are in the original contract that provide for payment following a termination for convenience. The two parties are now heading for the High Court with claims and counterclaims stemming from failure to deliver the project, termination of the main contract and assignment of a key... Read More

  • Engineering and construction firm Bechtel now has a court date set to enable its appeal against the award of the HS2 £1bn Old Oak Common station construction partner contract. Read More