BASSIE’S BUNGLE

Attorney-at-law John Bassie’s failure to inform a client about Scotiabank’s notice of foreclosure on her family home for 14 months formed part of the reason the General Legal Council (GLC) found him guilty of professional misconduct.

His delay, also, in handling an application for the grant of probate for his client’s deceased mother was significant for the three-member panel of the GLC’s disciplinary committee of Chair Peter Champagnie, KC; Carlene Larmond, KC; and Lilieth Deacon.

The disciplinary panel said that Bassie, who last week resigned as president of the Jamaican Bar Association, did not provide his client, the complainant in the matter, with all the information as to the progress of her business with due expedition although she had reasonably required him to do so.

The panel said that this ran contrary to Canon IV(r) of the legal profession (canons of professional ethics) rules.

It also determined that he did not deal with the client’s business with all due expedition, in breach of Canon IV(g), and acted with “inexcusable or deplorable negligence” in the performance of his duties in breach of Canon IV(s).

A hearing on the sanction is to come in December.

The Gleaner was unable to reach Bassie for comment on the matter. He has reportedly denied any wrongdoing.

Oswest Senior Smith, the lawyer for complainant Karen Sterling, said he would comment at a later time.

In her affidavit, Sterling, who is a financial controller, said that she retained Bassie in February 2011 to handle the application for a grant of probate in the estate of her mother, who had died two months earlier.

Sterling, who, along with her aunt were co-executors, said that she explained to Bassie that there was a lien from Scotiabank on a property owned by her mother and that the grant of probate was needed in order to liquidate other assets and settle the loan.

She said that she was having difficulties getting information on the loan from the bank and communicated this to Bassie in a meeting.

She said that Bassie was asked to make contact with Scotiabank and that she signed relevant documents needed to deal with the grant of probate.

Fourteen months later, she received a call from the bank in an attempt to locate her mother regarding defaulted payments on the loan.

Sterling said that she was “shocked” because she had submitted a death certificate and also believed that Bassie had made contact with the bank.

A meeting was had with Bassie, and the issue was raised, Sterling said, and it was reiterated to Bassie that it was important that he call the bank.

She said that she was also told at one point that a grant of probate could take years to settle.

On May 14, 2015, after several correspondences between her and Bassie and his team, Sterling said that she received a call from Bassie’s office. She said she was informed that her file appeared to be incomplete.

This was after the review of several files.

The complainant said she was told that the last thing on the file was a letter dated March 18, 2014, from Nunes, Scholefield, DeLeon & Co, attorneys for Scotiabank, stating the intention to foreclose on the property.

Five days after she had been informed, she met with Bassie and his team and was told that there was an agreement for sale, but that he was making arrangements to meet with Scotiabank’s lawyers to stop it.

At that meeting, she said that she also learnt that no document had been filed in court to probate the will.

However, she said that she left the meeting with hope because she was told that it was just an agreement.

At a final meeting on June 4, 2015, she said that she was informed that the sale of the property was final and that it was too late to stop it.

She said Bassie, in his defence, said that the blame should not solely be on him since the family knew of the loan and could have settled it if they wanted to.

Sterling said that she terminated the retainer and engaged the service of another law firm to probate the will.

This was handled within six months.

Bassie, in his affidavit, said that he was retained to make an application for the grant of probate. He said that he was not asked to do anything outside of that.

He denied several statements made by Sterling, including that he was to negotiate with the bank payment of arrears.

He also blamed shortcomings on a former employee.

He said that Sterling was aware of the pending foreclosure and did not respond to Scotiabank or its attorneys with respect to the notice.

Bassie also said that he was unable to obtain a grant of probate because at all material times, he was waiting for the complainant to locate the attesting witness.

This was countered by the GLC, which said evidence was provided showing that Bassie was given the name and location of the witness.

The disciplinary panel said given the nature of the letter from the bank’s attorneys, the notice it enclosed addressed to the estate in care of Bassie and the grave consequences of non-compliance with the notice, he was “under a duty to immediately inform” Sterling that he received those documents.

It said Bassie “acted with inexcusable and deplorable negligence when he failed for a period of 14 months” to notify Sterling of the letter.

kimone.francis@gleanerjm.com