Junior solicitor suspended for a year after email alteration in ‘moment of panic’

Avatar photo

By Legal Cheek on

22

Isolated incident


A junior solicitor has been suspended from practice for 12 months after admitting he altered correspondence with a client in what he described as a “moment of panic”.

Michael Goodwin, 40, joined Talbots Law in 2021 and had been qualified for less than two years when he mistakenly sent an email to the wrong address in a residential property matter.

Instead of immediately admitting the error, he amended the forwarded version the following day to make it appear it had been correctly sent first time round, writing: “I understand you’ve not received the attached.”

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found his dishonesty was confined to a single email and accepted it was a “brief, isolated incident rather than a prolonged or sustained act”. No harm was caused to the client.

The tribunal noted the misconduct brought “minimum benefit” to Goodwin, beyond perhaps sparing him some embarrassment over the initial mistake or the consequences of potential data breach.

The 2026 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

Goodwin admitted the alteration at an internal meeting three months later, before resigning from the firm and self-reporting to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). He accepted at the time that “he knew it was wrong and should not have done it”.

In mitigation — which the SRA did not accept — Goodwin said he had been under considerable emotional strain and struggling with the pressures of practice. Additional medical evidence was heard in private.

The SRA said the conduct was deliberate but carried out “in panic and haste”, stressing that Goodwin had shown remorse, made “open and frank admissions” and cooperated with the regulator throughout the investigation.

He agreed to a 12-month suspension and to pay £12,500 towards the SRA’s costs.

22 Comments

Reputable Trainee

£12,500 is very disproportionate for a junior. That’s no doubt going to come with a lot of financial strain.

Bamboozled laywer

He self reported, openly admitted the mistake, of which, there was one and caused no harm to anyone. How did the SRA still claim £12.5k worth of costs?!

Sra unfit

Can the SRA be reformed please? Thanks.

name

I reckon hundreds of solicitors in the UK have done something similar at some point in their career. This is not a proportionate or effective outcome…

Solicitor General

Should have been struck off for dishonesty

Ed China

So should you, for being a moron of industry.

Gareth

So should you for calling him a moron.

Anon

Is the issue here that the contents of an email were sent to the wrong address and this was not acknowledged or remedied?

It’s relatively common, in the event of an email bouncing or being stuck in one’s outbox, to follow up with a soft note to smooth over the interaction. As opposed to openly admitting to being an id*** who mistyped an addressed causing the email to bounce and then self reporting.

Obviously, if client information is delivered to the wrong person transparency with the client is required and the erroneous recipient should be asked to delete the correspondence.

Even in this case, which clearly involves dishonesty, a 12 month suspension and 12.5k fine seem harsh. Do the SRA think the average solicitor is driving a Lambo like the infamous LegalCheek Kirlkland NQs?

Kirkland NQ

Pocket change my dear bean.

£12k is my monthly budget for the finest Bolivian the City can provide.

SWA

The punishments do not “seem” harsh. They are harsh. Egregious, in fact. I detest the SRA.

Greeno

12-month ban and £12,500 in costs for that???? The SRA should be ashamed. If a partner did that, the SRA probably would have given them the £12,500 instead.

Disgruntled Wig

The SRA outsource their prosecution work to expensive civil barristers at high hourly rates. The net result being these sort of disproportionate costs orders. The public purse pays a fraction to a Barrister for prosecuting serious violence. Nice work if you can get it.

Charmed as always to see that self reporting an error garners a one year suspension. But serious offences, dishonesty and sexual don’t.

Remember kids, if you are going to break the law or professional rules, go big and you’ll probably go home. To a comfortable place, with a small fine compared to your means and ability to continue your practise and behaviour.

Klaxon

Agreed on the disproportionate costs. But serious offences or dishonesty for a solicitor usually equals certain disbarment and basically is career suicide.

Quite a few self-proclaimed “Masters of the Universe” have fallen this way in the City.

Wigmore

£12,500!! Come on SRA. Junior lawyer where you note no harm was done and he’s admitted wrong doing?

Hope you agreed payment terms.

Hatchet

24 month repayment plan on Klarna baby. Going to the local Cashino tonite and hoping to win big

Someone’s on the make…

Another one that the BSB would have given an oral warning and a couple of hundred pounds costs on had this been self-reported by a barrister (which would have been proportionate).

The SRA is draconian in the extreme.

Cutting some fat lines in my top Chambers

Should’ve studied harder and become a barrister then my dear boy.

Tally ho!

Reputable Trainee

That’s the SRA Christmas party fund sorted!

Insanity

Way to put off anyone from ever self reporting again. Honestly what a minor incident, and he gets a £12k fine?

Joke.

Uhm

I really dislike the SRA and just on a human level this is minor and I want him to not face trouble. BUT, he falsified a document. Editing a FWD email is falsifying a document (the email being forwarded). There are very few things that solicitors must never under no circumstances do or else the system structurally collapses. The second it occurs to any SRA regulated individual that they should change something on a document (without disclosure), a red banner must immediately appear in front of their eyes (by their imagination) that says ACTION PROHIBITED. This should be absolute second nature. It’s a fat, bold, red, unmistakable line. There is no grey area and no doubt to be had. Otherwise, I’m gonna be in court tomorrow wondering whether the certified copies provided by solicitors of xyz are real. We so have a (limited) duty to society and it’s this.

Angry junior

Not just the money. They have ruined someone’s career and made them untouchable for a minor self reported mistake.

How does this stand aside the SRA’s incredible work allowing Axiom to lose £60m of client money and giving them a £4300 fine?

The SRA are a bunch of performative bullies, interested only in adding to the stress and misery of the profession, coming down harshly on unrepresented juniors so they have some outcomes to point to. Their focus is clearly not where it should be.

The people on these tribunals and the barrister who claimed these costs should also be ashamed of themselves.

RNGesus

Surprised they didn’t sentence him to be smited by God.

Join the conversation

Related Stories