John Cottrell, a former investigator with the Law Society of Upper Canada, said staff probing lawyer misconduct faced “a lot of pressure” to close case files quickly, and were barred from sharing information with police even in cases of suspected criminal activity.
The investigators
responsible for protecting the public from bad lawyers are stymied by
heavy caseloads and confidentiality rules that prohibit them from
sharing information with police, according to a former investigator for
the Law Society of Upper Canada.
John Cottrell, who
worked for the law society in Toronto from 2007 to 2011, said staff were
under “a lot of pressure” to meet monthly targets and complete cases
quickly. He was a forensic auditor, part of a team that included
investigators, auditors and investigative counsel working on files.
“In the end, most of
us were just looking to close files,” said Cottrell, 65. “That was the
easiest way to meet your quota, was to close.”
Cottrell said he is taking the unusual step of speaking out about his concerns because he considers it a “public duty.”
In cases where there
was evidence of an alleged criminal offence — such as a lawyer stealing
trust funds from clients — investigators were “not allowed” to
communicate with police because of confidentiality rules, he said.
“I don’t agree with
it. I think you should be able to provide the police with information
and documents if necessary to assist,” he said. “We’re supposed to be
protecting the little guy, and yet we’re really protecting the lawyer …
It’s disheartening to see.”
A Star investigation
earlier this year revealed that more than 230 lawyers were sanctioned
by the law society in the past decade for criminal-like activity that
included stealing from their clients. While most were reprimanded,
suspended or disbarred by the profession’s regulator, fewer than one in
five were charged criminally, the Star found. Most avoided jail.
More at thestar.com
The law society did
not respond to specific allegations, but said in general that the
regulator’s “mandate to protect the public requires both comprehensive
and timely investigations.”
“Our investigators
meet this challenge,” spokesman Roy Thomas said in an email. “In the
course of these investigations, we receive confidential information. We
co-operate and report to appropriate authorities, including police,
through a designated process.”
Over the past decade,
Thomas said the law society has made the disciplinary process more
transparent, and pushed through amendments to legislation to allow the
society to “report (lawyers) to authorities in cases of serious risk of
harm.”
He said the law society meets “regularly with police forces all across the province.”
“We continue to look for additional opportunities to make our protection of the public even stronger,” he added.
In a statement on its website
in May, the law society called the Star’s investigation “unbalanced and
misleading,” and said the society has a “proactive relationship” with
police.
But during his time at
the law society, Cottrell said neither investigators nor their managers
were allowed to share information with law enforcement, even in cases
where police were conducting a parallel criminal investigation.
Before working at the
law society, Cottrell spent 30 years investigating securities fraud and
insider trading at the Ontario Securities Commission. Some of his
high-profile cases included Argosy Financial, which defrauded 1,000
investors out of $27 million in the 1970s, as well as the notorious
penny-stock dealers of the late ’90s and early 2000s.
Cottrell said the
desire to conduct thorough investigations at the law society was
thwarted by the need to meet quotas. In his case, as a forensic auditor
who handled more complex financial cases, he was expected to close four
cases per month. He said investigators had quotas of between six and
eight cases per month.
A case was considered
“closed” when the complaint was dismissed during the investigation, or
when a disciplinary hearing was concluded, he said.
“If you took a case to
a hearing, you might be required to sit in a hearing in support of
litigation counsel … for a week, but the clock is still ticking on your
files,” he said. “You don’t get any credit for that until the file is
closed.”
Cottrell would not
discuss the details of specific cases, citing confidentiality rules. But
the pressure to meet targets put tremendous stress on investigators in
his department, he said, and meant that there was rarely time for more
than a “peripheral investigation.”
“The cases that go
through (to a hearing) are investigated well. But, essentially, when you
are pushed to do an investigation quickly, the result is that you tend
to take shortcuts,” he said. “It was understood (among investigators)
that lawyers weren’t being admonished for their actions.”
When Cottrell worked
at the law society, he said there were about 25 forensic auditors and
investigators — “too few … to complete all the files that were
assigned,” he said.
The law society
receives roughly 4,700 complaints each year. Of those, about 3,100 are
authorized for full investigation, and 100 go on to a formal
disciplinary hearing.
Cottrell is the second
former law society employee to raise doubts about whether the
professional regulator is adequately protecting the public. In May,
former Brampton Crown attorney Steve Sherriff, who was in charge of
disciplinary prosecutions at the law society from 1982 to 1989, told the
Star that the law society can — and should — report bad lawyers to law
enforcement.
“I am not confident
that the public gets fair warning of criminal conduct by lawyers,” he
said. “I continue to have serious concerns that the public is needlessly
at risk.”
At the time Cottrell
left the law society in October 2011, he was carrying nearly 50 cases,
documents show. That is roughly 10 times as heavy as his caseload at the
Ontario Securities Commission, where he was typically assigned to about
four cases at once, and there was no quota, he said.
During his first few
years at the law society, Cottrell said he got positive feedback from
his managers. That changed in late 2010, when he was placed on a
“performance improvement plan” because of the length of time he took to
complete files, documents show.
Ultimately, he decided
he didn’t need the money — or the stress. He said he started closing
cases more quickly to bring his numbers up. Within a few months of
getting off the improvement plan, he resigned.
Rachel Mendleson can be reached at rmendleson@thestar.ca or 416-869-4059.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comments.
Canadian Insurance News does not endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comments, you acknowledge that we have the right to reproduce, broadcast and publicize those comments or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever.