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.
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
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".
Comments
235
228
233
214
200
235
246
232
200
249
233
227
230
256
220
229
212
247
228
231
244
229
260
219
221
235
243
272
224
238
222
231
233
230
245
234
253
247
240
219
218
207
227
228
214
226
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.
240
240
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".
231
246
235
229
231
242
210
216
Quite modest if you ask me.
240
220
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.
227
249
223
237
228
247
205
235
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...
223
221
237
248