A family solicitor accused of fraud has denied buying a house belonging to an estate he was administering for less than it was worth.
Richard Walker, 54, is facing five counts of fraud in connection with his purchase of a 17th century listed house which formed the bulk of an estate he was appointed to administer.
The Rottingdean solicitor is accused of attempting to make a £500,000 profit by selling it on, of failing to pay rent when he lived there before the sale, of charging unnecessary building works to the estate and of overcharging the estate for his legal services.
This week, a jury was told by prosecution counsel John Ojakovoh that Walker bought the house, known as Beestons, for £775,000 despite one valuation recommending marketing it for £1.1 million – then put it on the market himself for £1.3 million less than two weeks later.
Defending, Matthew Radstone said: “The defendant disputes that he bought the property in question at an undervalue.
“A solicitor who is advising the estate is permitted to purchase assets of that estate so long as it is done in an lawful way.
“The defendant took advice from the Solicitors Regulation Authority and they advised him that there was no conflict of interest in his role and obligations as a solicitor to the estate while offering to purchase the property and he was allowed to do so.
“The defence case is that it was not. The test is whether property is sold for a reasonable price, not the best price. It was at his insistence that multiple valuations were obtained by Wayne Flamank [the will’s executor].
“He kept Wayne Flamank and his mother informed of matters throughout.”
Mr Radstone said the defence would also argue that some of the building works the prosecution said were unnecessary were needed to improve the property’s value and saleability.
And it would say that others, such as chimney sweeping, were done as a legal requirement of the house being rented to him, while woodworm treatment was done at the request of his mortgage company, and sellers routinely pick up the bill for such requirements.
Meanwhile, the defence case is that the agreed rent was not paid for the period Walker lived in the house before the sale was completed because he and his wife ended up undertaking work, such as gardening and house clearance, equal to the value of the rent.
And Mr Radstone said the defence would call its own expert witness who would say while Walker’s fees were high, they were not excessively so.
The trial, which is scheduled to last for five weeks, continues.
