Attorney loses appeal in 2019 land sale fraud case

THE Court of Appeal has upheld a ruling that an attorney was negligent in handling a 2019 land sale that turned out to be a sophisticated fraud.

The case involved the sale of a property in Barataria, where a fraudster posing as the true owner, Robert John, sold the land to Keelan Aaron Hunte for $840,000. First Citizens Bank (FCB) provided a $650,000 loan to Hunte and held the property as security. Months later, the real Robert John discovered the fraudulent sale and challenged the transaction in court.

In 2023, Justice Frank Seepersad found attorney Richard Beckles, trading as The Legal Consultancy, and his junior attorney, Claire Pascall, failed to properly check the fraudster’s identity. They missed obvious red flags on the identification documents, including mismatched passport numbers, identical photographs on both ID and passport, spelling errors, and address discrepancies. The court ruled that even “an untrained eye” would have seen the inconsistencies.

Hunte was left paying a mortgage for property he never legally owned, and FCB’s loan was left unsecured. Beckles was ordered to pay more than $525,000 to Hunte, $386,000 to FCB, and nearly $100,000 in costs to John.

On appeal, Beckles argued that the trial judge unfairly relied on document discrepancies not raised in the pleadings and overstated the duty of care required. However, Justices Maria Wilson, Ronnie Boodoosingh, and Geoffrey Henderson dismissed these arguments, finding that Beckles had a duty to take “reasonable verification steps” given the rise of property fraud.

“The lawyers had an obligation to undertake a thorough review,” Justice Boodoosingh wrote. “A reasonable and competent attorney would have identified these warning flags once a meticulous examination of the documents was engaged.”

The court stressed that identity verification is a critical part of modern conveyancing, especially in Trinidad and Tobago, where property fraud has been on the rise.

The appeal was dismissed, and Beckles remains liable for all damages and costs.

In the appeal, Beckles did not dispute the legal test for assessing an attorney’s conduct, namely that it should meet the standard of a reasonably competent practitioner, not that of a particularly meticulous one. Instead, he challenged Seepersad’s findings of fact.

Boodoosingh held that Seepersad had properly considered relevant evidence, including transaction documents and discrepancies in identification records, such as inconsistent signatures, spelling of names, and addresses.

Seepersad’s findings of negligence were upheld, as Beckles had failed to notice obvious irregularities, question the vendor, or advise his clients about “red flags,” leaving the purchaser without a good title and the mortgage unsecured.

Since Beckles acted for both the purchaser and the mortgagor without independent representation for the vendor, greater vigilance was required, the court ruled.

Shiv Sharma and Adrian Byrne represented Beckles.

Tara Thompson and Justin Leung represented John.

Justin Junkere and Alana Praimdass appeared for Hunte, and Jean-Louis Kelly and Dante Selman-Carrington represented FCB.