Exclusive: Capsticks fires partner for fiddling expenses

Capsticks, the top medical negligence firm, has sacked a partner and called in the police after he was accused of embezzlement.

The firm would only give a statement saying that it had "uncovered evidence of false claims by one of its employees. That employee has been dismissed. We are working and co-operating with the police and the SRA." However a source was rather more forthcoming. He claimed that the employee was actually a partner, and that he had been siphoning off £500 a month in his expenses for about four years. Presumably he couldn't make ends meet at a firm where the partners make an average of only £400,000...

The source added that the partner had even taken the charity money from the firm's regular cake sales. Ripping off your partners? Criminal proceedings. Stealing from kids with cancer? Priceless.

That'll just about cover the Porsche's next service

The firm does a huge amount of work for the NHS and will be praying that the relationship won't be hit by this.

A spokesman for the SRA said "we don’t usually confirm or deny if we are investigating someone, it’s only if disciplinary action [by the SRA] becomes necessary that it becomes a matter of public record".

Tip Off ROF

Comments

This is really quite disgusting. It's a very small place; so it reflects very badly on the firm.

Lolz at "top" medical negligence firm

Genuinely have no idea who Capsticks are. This is non-news.

@ 08:34. It makes it less newsworthy because YOU have not heard of the firm? So it would be news if this was a Magic Circle partner. Come on. By the way Capsticks are a Top 80 Law firm...

@08.34 - Capsticks are the subject of the story you've just gone to the effort to comment about. You're welcome.

Some touchy a Capsticks people posting now. Hopefully not touchy enough to start touching the petty cash.

Top 80. Wow.

@0813 - lolz? Maybe you need to read the Legal 500? Or better still, a dictionary? Seriously - LOLZ?!

Capsticks are a niche firm, fighting a number of similar size competitors within that niche. This will definitely damage their reputation.

@13:29 - probably not fair for you to tar everyone with the same brush. Or to be in the legal profession when you can't string a coherent sentence together.

My dad's bigger than your dad.

Loving the posts from those who are clearly Capsticks staff. Obviously got nothing better to do than get riled by others posting. Hope you fare better when dealing with actual work, or is this how Top 80 law firm lawyers operate?

Once you get past Top 50, you probably shouldn't label 'Top 80'. Surely 'Top 80' is to 'Top 100', as £1.99 is to £2. Just go with what 14:04 said with the last three words of 08:13 if you want to describe the firm with credibility. I've never come across them, but a boy at Primary School used to always have a couple in his packed lunch every day and they tasted really bad.

Don't see how it reflects badly on the firm. They've got over 200 lawyers working there - this guy is hardly going to be representative of them all.

Sadly small firms like these often lack and/or cannot afford robust financial controls

At the risk of incurring the wrath of some commenters I will say that Capsticks was The Lawyer's niche firm of the year in 2010. Partners picking up £400,000 is not small beer. They represent the NHS in a lot of big negligence cases, where compo runs into millions, as well as working on their outsourcing contracts and property matters. Laugh all you like, a lot of City bods would be better of a Captsticks out in Wimbledon than they are slogging at 12 and 14 hour days in the square mile or out in Canary Wharf. And now, I don't work at Capsticks, although I did put in a brief stint there.

Top 80. Ha ha ha. Bet Tinpot and Co are sh*tting themselves about Capsticks.

Sigh at the Capsticks automaton who doesn't know "Lolz" is in the vernacular

Automaton, perhaps. Capsticks, afraid not. If text speak makes you feel clever, you keep going with it. However, probably best to couple it with a knowledge of the facts...

Now come on people, expense scandals are very fashionable right now.

Personally, I found Capsticks to be a rather unpleasant bunch, Top 80 or not.

How on earth can you tar 300 people with the same brush? Think that says an awful lot more about you than about anyone at Capsticks...

@anonymous user
25/04/2014 14:47 If you are going to try and criticise a person's use of English, please don't start your sentence with a conjunction. It makes you look stupid.

@anonymous user
28/04/2014 09:43
If you are commenting on another person's use of English I suggest you check your own grammar first. The correct English usage is "try TO criticise" not "try AND criticise".

I say old chaps. Why focus on the issue when yopu can get a few cheap shots in on the use (or misuse) of the Queen's.

The only thing I know about about capsticks is that the chinny asked about my political leaning before talking about the role. Although it could have just been the chinny being weird it certainly put me off straight away (almost as much as working with Wombles).

Slightly off-topic: I dated a lawyer at Capsticks a few years ago. I dumped her after only a few months after I found out she was stealing from me. She's still working there.

It's not very fair to abuse the thinly veiled Capsticks chappy for labelling it a top 80 firm; it's top 77 according to wikipedia, sandwiched between such legal powerhouses as Fosters and Bircham Vacuum Bell.

Quite modest if you ask me.

What a scumbag.

I worked for Capsticks in one of the support functions a couple of years ago. I found them to be, on the whole, really sound people who cared a great deal about producing high quality work and looking after their clients. There's always going to be a bad apple in any barrel and every firm picks up a scandal or two (the global firm I currently work for is certainly no exception). Glass houses, folks.

Can't help noticing so many commenting here seem to be fixated by the size of the firm. Ok, we get it. You work for a big city firm and you look down on these guys, you are special indeed. Now get over yourself.

Agree re scumbag, though fear is Capsticks have more of them lurking in the shadows.

Size is everything and anybody who tells you different is just trying to make you feel less inadequate

"Fear is Capsticks have more of them lurking in the shadows". Why is that a rational fear? One person did a bad thing. They happened to work at Capsticks. Could have been any other firm. All the financial controls in the world can't prevent fraud in a world where trust is supposed to count for something! I don't know the firm particularly well, but it does seem that there are several people who seem to be holding some kind of grudge and are using this as therapy!! I imagine the firm is shocked and distressed by this - it's a bit sad that there is no solidarity in the legal ranks, and instead, a desire to jump on the firm whilst it is down..

"it's a bit sad that there is no solidarity in the legal ranks, and instead, a desire to jump on the firm whilst it is down.."

Much like those who think they can spot Capsticks staff getting touchy in the comments, I reckon I might have spotted some Bevans and Beachcroft types kicking about...

interesting