The Solicitors Regulation Authority has secured a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal sanction against Sarinjit Singh Bahia after admitted accounts and client money breaches at Consilium Legal Limited led to a £15,000 fine, a costs order and seven years of restrictions on his practice.
Bahia, admitted as a solicitor in 1993, was the sole director and owner of the Birmingham firm at the time of the matters considered by the tribunal. The SRA’s published record states that the SDT approved an agreed outcome on 12 May 2026, following an earlier SRA decision to bring disciplinary proceedings.
The order prevents Bahia from acting as a manager or owner of any authorised body, acting as a COLP or COFA, holding or receiving client money, signing client or office accounts, or authorising transfers from those accounts.
The regulatory significance is wider than one practitioner’s sanction. The case involved admitted failures around estate accounts, client money and firm financial controls, including misleading information about charges to an estate and the handling of money that should not have been treated casually outside the client account system.
The regulatory significance is wider than one practitioner’s sanction. The admitted breaches touched estate accounts, client money and firm financial controls, including misleading information about charges and the handling of funds outside the usual client account protections. Solicitors working in probate, private client and property matters will recognise the risk: what begins as poor administration or weak supervision can quickly become a disciplinary issue when billing, estate money and personal involvement overlap.
Bahia’s previous appearances before the SDT in 2007 and 2019 gave the latest case a sharper edge. The tribunal’s decision to move beyond the sanction first put forward by the parties shows how earlier findings can affect the assessment of later accounts breaches, even where dishonesty is not pursued or proved. Compliance officers should treat that as a warning that regulatory history is not background noise; it can shape both sanction and restrictions when client money controls fail again.
The practical lesson for law firm management is uncomfortable but clear. Outdated templates, poor billing records, weak file supervision, missing reconciliations and informal handling of estate money can all become part of the same regulatory narrative. The risk is sharper for a sole practitioner, director or owner who also controls the client relationship, because without an effective second check on money movements, estate accounts or billing entries, a mistake can quickly become a disciplinary issue.
The SRA and SDT outcome should prompt firms handling probate, conveyancing and private client matters to test whether COLP and COFA oversight is strong enough to detect client money issues before they become disciplinary proceedings. Bahia’s restrictions also show that sanctions do not end with a fine; they can follow a solicitor into future practice and limit ownership, management and access to client funds for years.