Susan Jane
England
Solicitor
189388
Decision - Sanction
Outcome: Rebuke
Outcome date: 27 May 2026
Published date: 1 June 2026
Firm details
Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome
Name: Parry Law
Address(es): 12-14 Oxford Street, Whitstable, CT5 1DE
Firm ID: 486915
Firm or organisation at date of publication
Name: Mowll Limited
Address(es): Trafalgar House, Gordon Road, Whitfield, Dover, CT16 3PN
Firm ID: 611595
Outcome details
This outcome was reached by SRA decision.
Decision details
1. Agreed outcome
1.1. Susan Jane England (‘Ms England’), a solicitor of Mowll Limited, agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of her conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (‘SRA’):
- she is rebuked
- to the publication of this agreement
- she will pay the costs of the investigation of £600.
2.1. On 10 August 2023, Kent Police were called after members of the public reported a woman sitting in her car who appeared to be intoxicated. When officers attended at the scene, Ms England was in the back of an ambulance and the ambulance crew informed the police that Ms England had been sitting in the driver’s seat when they arrived. A police officer asked Ms England to provide a specimen of breath for analysis at the scene, which Ms England refused to provide.
2.2. Ms England was then arrested and taken to Margate Police Station. At the police station Ms England was asked to provide two specimens of breath for analysis, which Ms England refused to provide.
2.3. On 11 August 2023 Ms England was charged at Margate Police station with two counts of failing to provide.
2.4. On 7 December 2023 at Margate Magistrates’ Court Ms England pled guilty and was convicted of the criminal offence of Failure to provide specimen – person in charge of a vehicle, Contrary to section 7(6) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 Ms England received the following sentence:
- Community Order to be completed within 12 months.
- 40 hours of unpaid work to be completed within 12 months.
- Disqualification from driving for 6 months.
- Surcharge of £114.
- Costs of £85.
2.5. On 13 November 2024 Ms England notified the SRA that she was subject to a criminal charge and conviction, 14 months after the date of her charge and 11 months after the date of her conviction.
2.6. Ms England was employed by Mowll Limited from 2 March 2026.
3. Admissions
3.1. Ms England makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:
- that by virtue of her conviction on 7 December 2023, she failed to act in a way that upholds the constitutional principle of the rule of law, and the proper administration of justice, in breach of Principle 1 of the SRA Principles.
- that by virtue of her conviction on 7 December 2023, she failed to act in a way that upholds the public trust and confidence in the solicitors’ profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons, in breach of Principle 2 of the SRA Principles.
- that by her conduct, she failed to notify the SRA promptly that she was subject to a criminal charge and conviction, and in doing so breached Paragraph 7.6 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs, RFLs and RSLs.
4. Why a written rebuke is an appropriate outcome
4.1. The SRA’s Enforcement Strategy sets out its approach to the use of its enforcement powers where there has been a failure to meet its standards or requirements.
4.2. The SRA considers that a written rebuke is the appropriate outcome because:
- Ms England was convicted of a criminal offence.
- Ms England was an experienced practitioner at the date of the conduct.
- Ms England’s conduct has put the public confidence in in the solicitors’ profession at risk.
- The agreed outcome is a proportionate outcome in the public interest
- There was no lasting significant harm to consumers or third parties.
4.3. When considering the appropriate sanctions and controls in this matter, the SRA has taken into account the admissions made by Ms England and the following mitigation which she has put forward:
- Ms England pled guilty to the criminal charge at the first opportunity.
- Ms England was sentenced to a low-level community order.
- Ms England has expressed remorse that the breaches occurred.
- Ms England was experiencing stressful personal circumstance at the time of the events leading to her conviction.
- There is a low risk of repetition.
- Ms England has no adverse regulatory history.
- Ms England co-operated with the SRA investigation.
4.4. A rebuke is appropriate to maintain professional standards and uphold public confidence in the solicitors’ profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons.
4.5. A rebuke is also intended to deter the individual and others from similar behaviour in the future. Any lesser sanction would not provide a credible deterrent to Ms England and others. A rebuke therefore meets the requirements of rule 3.1 of the Regulatory and Disciplinary Procedure Rules.
5. Publication
5.1. The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process. Ms England agrees to the publication of this agreement.
6. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement
6.1. Ms England agrees that she will not deny the admissions made in this agreement or act in any way which is inconsistent with it.
6.2. If Ms England denies the admissions or acts in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be considered further by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary outcome or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations.
6.3. Denying the admissions made or acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of principles 2 and 5 of the Principles and paragraph 7.3 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs.
7. Costs
7.1. Ms England agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of £600. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.