EXCLUSIVE Forsters partner out over misconduct claims

_{When you realise a colleague is completely unguarded.}

A Forsters partner has quit the West End firm following an investigation into allegations of misconduct.

‘Z’ had only recently joined the partnership at the Mayfair-based real estate and private client specialist, which employs 258 solicitors.

It was a short residency. On Monday all staff received a brief email from Natasha Rees, the firm’s Senior Partner, which stated that Z had tendered his resignation and accepted a position to work in-house as General Counsel at one of Forsters' clients “which he starts today”.

Staff were told to speak to two of the remaining partners in Z’s practice if they had questions about his matters, but no mention was made of the allegations. “We wish [Z] well with his move”, Rees signed off.

A source said it was claims about Z’s other moves which resulted in his sudden departure, and that he resigned after the SRA was told that he had been physically inappropriate with “multiple women” in the office.

A spokesperson for Forsters said, “We can confirm that a partner has resigned from the firm following an independent investigation. The matter is with the SRA and therefore we are not in a position to offer further comment”.

Forsters rebuffed an accusation that it had promoted Z to the partnership despite being aware of some of the allegations, saying that it had reported the matter to the SRA in line with its professional obligations.

“What we can say is that, as a firm, we expect the highest standards of professional integrity and conduct from all our people. Where concerns are raised, we take appropriate and swift action, as we did in this case”, the firm’s spokesperson said.

"We have had a report and are investigating before deciding on next steps", said an SRA spokesperson.

An insider told ROF that Forsters has booted two other partners in recent years “for conduct with junior women”, which had resulted in emergency training for partners.

Z did not respond to a request for comment from ROF via LinkedIn, other than to delete his profile.

Comments

It would be very odd if a mere allegation prevented someone from being promoted, given how many false allegations there are.

Can we be sure that there ever really was a partner at Forsters for them to get rid of? I can see no evidence in the article that any particular person was or wasn't inducted into the partnership, nor of the fact that they subsequently joined any particular client of the firm's as an in-house lawyer.

Another dubious allegation, perhaps?

@9.15 - indeed, there is no evidence of anything and we therefore can't be sure of anything. He might just have moved to a better job. There is no evidence of a sexual angle.

The real story is the pressure that someone senior in HR exerted to get juniors to reveal what had allegedly happened - threatening that if they didn’t tell all, they themselves would be subject to SRA sanction. Whatever happened to due process at Forsters?

Taking this inquiry one step further. Does anyone actually know anyone who works at Forsters? I'm not sure that there is any evidence that the firm exists? Possibly suggesting the existence of a wide ranging conspiracy to tarnish the reputations of male law firm partners generally. I'm not saying there is, not explicitly, I'm just asking questions.

@10:28 https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Is+Forsters+a+real+law+firm%3F

Are there any male law firm partners? I am not aware of any evidence that law firms are not in fact run by lizard-people in human skin.

Another lizard conspiracy, perhaps?

Talking of Forsters - I have fond memories of one Tony P(something can’t remember), he was a gent.

Can Forsters or the SRA explain why this partner has been given the benefit of anonymity and allowed to move to a cushy GC job immediately whereas if it was a trainee or associate, the firm / SRA would have immediately disclosed his name, DOB and name of first pet?

@10.28 - are you saying the firm doesn't exist? Huge if true.

It may be that false allegations were made and that misandry was the route, we simply don't know.

@13:28
The firm absolutely exists. Google is your friend.

@15.26 - can you be sure that Google's intentions are entirely friendly?

@11.40 - are you saying that all male law firm partners are really lizards? Huge if true.

@Explain - maybe because he hasn't actually been found guilty of anything. People are allowed to change jobs you know.

And male partners who are the subject of allegations are more likely to be named than anyone else in reality.

I like “Z”!

11th @ 17.33 - yes, because neither of you were found to have committed any wrongdoing by the BSB.

@Anonymous Insider on 10.23 10 Nov

I think the question is more: whenever has due process ever happened at Forsters?

That said, it is nice that this time Forsters have squeezed out the (alleged) perpetrator rather than his victims. That's a progressive firm right there

@10 @15.41 - what evidence do you have that they aren't?

I mean "Z" sounds like a made up letter to me. People say its at the end of the alphabet, but I certainly don't know anyone who has used it. This feels more and more like the woke brigade pushing their hateful agenda again.

Anonymous 13 November 23 14:11: no, I wasn’t cleared by the BSB. I’m a straightforward harasser. The reason I like “Z” is because he seems to be as dodgy as me!