Sarah Anne Hemmings

Introduction

Sarah Anne Hemmings is a Buckinghamshire solicitor who was struck off the roll after being found to have taken steps to secure a £2,000 legacy left to her by a client — her own solicitor — and then to have concealed that the money was intended for her own account. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal approved an agreed outcome with the Solicitors Regulation Authority striking her off after she admitted serious professional misconduct including dishonesty, breaches of trust and conflicts of interest. Admitted in 1997, she had been a member at Wilkins Solicitors LLP in Aylesbury, and the case against her also covered conflicts of interest and the disclosure of one client’s confidential information to another.

Background Information

Hemmings was admitted as a solicitor in 1997 and had practised for close to two decades by the time of the events at the centre of the case. She was a member at Wilkins Solicitors LLP in Aylesbury. The tribunal’s decision identified her clients only by number: her work for “Client 1”, “Client 2” and “Client 3” in 2010 and 2011 formed one strand of the allegations, while a client referred to as “Client 4” stood at the heart of the legacy affair that ended her career. She resigned from Wilkins in April 2016, and by the time of the hearing she was employed at Caversham Solicitors in Reading.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Adjudicated vs. alleged. The findings described here are a matter of tribunal record: Hemmings admitted serious professional misconduct including dishonesty, breaches of trust and conflicts of interest, and the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal approved an agreed outcome striking her off the roll. These are regulatory findings, not criminal convictions: she was never criminally charged.

The case centred on “Client 4”, who left Hemmings a £2,000 legacy in her will. Between January and February 2014, Hemmings failed to advise the client to seek independent legal advice before making the bequest to her own solicitor. After the client’s death, she requested a £2,000 cheque from the estate, and later arranged another cheque payable to National Savings, concealing that the funds were intended for her own account; the tribunal found she deliberately sought to hide her benefit from the firm’s other managers. In April 2016 she sent the cheque with instructions that the funds be held on her behalf, even though senior colleague Robert Smith had told her she was not entitled to the money; the tribunal found her dishonest and in breach of core principles. A second strand concerned her 2010-2011 work for “Client 1”, “Client 2” and “Client 3”: she accepted instructions despite clear conflicts of interest and disclosed confidential information about one client to another, including telling a client private matters involving another client’s Lasting Power of Attorney. In May 2011 she misled a client in an email denying contact with another party despite several engagements; that, too, was found dishonest.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The tribunal’s assessment of Hemmings was severe. It found her conduct went to “the heart of a solicitor’s duties”, placed her culpability at the highest end, and assessed the damage to the reputation of the profession as “very significant”. Misconduct of that kind, it held, was too serious for a reprimand, a fine or suspension; with no mitigation offered and no exceptional circumstances, striking off was the only proportionate outcome. Hemmings did not attend the hearing: the case was determined on the papers after an agreed outcome with the SRA. She was ordered to pay £15,000 of the SRA’s costs, a figure reduced from more than £27,000 in recognition of the settlement.

Current Status

Hemmings is struck off the roll of solicitors. The order came through an agreed outcome with the regulator and was determined on the papers, without her attendance, and the £15,000 costs order against her reflects the settlement rather than a fully contested hearing. The findings against her are regulatory: she was never criminally charged, and the admissions — dishonesty, breaches of trust and conflicts of interest — were made in professional disciplinary proceedings. At the time of the hearing she was employed at Caversham Solicitors in Reading; the reported record does not show what became of that position after the tribunal’s decision.

Impact on Their Career/Life

A solicitor since 1997, Hemmings lost the ability to practise altogether at the age when much of her career still lay ahead of her. The findings combined dishonesty with breaches of trust and conflicts of interest, and the tribunal’s conclusions — that her culpability sat at the highest end, that her conduct struck at the heart of a solicitor’s duties, and that the reputational damage was very significant — removed any lesser sanction from consideration. Beyond the strike-off itself, she carries a £15,000 liability for the regulator’s costs. The case also illustrates how a solicitor’s position of trust inside a firm can be turned against the firm’s own clients: the tribunal found she deliberately hid her benefit from the firm’s other managers while holding herself out as the client’s adviser.

Sources

• Solicitor News, “Sarah Anne Hemmings solicitor struck off legacy scandal”, 12 September 2025. source