Mr Simpkins admitted all the allegations, save that he denied his conduct lacked integrity or had been dishonest. The Tribunal found the admissions to have been properly made. The Tribunal considered that in allowing a cash shortage, failing to have sufficient supervision or oversight of the Firm, and providing inaccurate and misleading information to the SRA during a forensic investigation, Mr Simpkins’ conduct lacked integrity as alleged.  

The Tribunal did not find that his conduct had been dishonest; the Tribunal was not satisfied that Mr Simpkins knew that the information he provided to the Forensic Investigation Officer of the SRA had been inaccurate and misleading, notwithstanding that he ought to have known that it was.