Katrina Sriranpong: A Criminal? (2024)


Toronto lawyer Katrina Sriranpong received a three-month ban from the practice of law after she self-reported her own professional misconduct to the Law Society of British Columbia. The suspension resulted from her negligent management of client funds.

Improper Management of Client Funds

Katrina Sriranpong admitted to mismanaging about $70,000 in cash that she received from 17 clients. She should have transferred the funds into a trust account in accordance with law society accounting requirements, but she deposited them into her personal account instead.

Nothing Malevolent is Occurring

Although Sriranpong’s actions violated accounting standards, it doesn’t appear that she meant any harm. According to her consent agreement with the law society, she stated that she felt consumers had approved her to manage their fee payments as her own property and that she charged set legal fees for certain services, thus she did not need a trust account.

Absence of dedication and comprehension of the Trust Account

The rules of the law society would have required Katrina Sriranpong to hold advance payments from clients in trust accounts or obtain fully informed written consent if she was going to hold them as her personal property. It’s probable that the clients didn’t fully understand what a trust account was, even after Sriranpong gave them verbal explanations.

Absence of revenue growth or clientele loss

Every assignment that Katrina Sriranpong took on was completed, and no clients experienced financial loss. Neither she nor her clients benefited monetarily from her actions. She maintained positive customer relationships, and a number of them sent letters of support complimenting her work.

Duration and Condition of Non-Practicing

While Sriranpong was taking on private immigration law clients, the misconduct occurred between 2016 and 2018. She stopped practicing law in November 2018 and has been a non-practicing member of the bar association ever since.

Positive features and conditions that mitigate

The fact that Sriranpong had no prior misbehavior, had finished her trust accounting coursework, and had made outstanding contributions to both society and the legal profession were mitigating factors. Her work with refugees, vulnerable communities, and anti-human trafficking programs has earned her recognition. She is British Columbia’s only Thai-speaking immigration lawyer.

Time of Suspension

Considering her bad behavior, Katrina Sriranpong From January 17 until April 17, Katrina Sriranpong will be out of commission for three months.

Awaiting Reply and Volunteer Work

Because of her unique skills as an immigration lawyer who speaks Thai, other Thai clients are eagerly anticipating Sriranpong’s return to the practice. She has also collaborated with groups that support these causes, animal rights, refugees, and victims of human trafficking.

Failure to Maintain Accounting Records and Status as Non-Practicing

Katrina Sriranpong, a lawyer in Vancouver, also admitted that she had broken the law society’s standards by not keeping certain accounting records. She stopped participating in the group in November 2018 due to her maternity leave.

Context and environment of the practise

Vinnie Yuen, the communications officer for the legal society, states that Sriranpong used to practice immigration law out of a base in Surrey.

Absence of financial benefit or loss of clients

As per the terms of Sriranpong’s cooperation agreement, her mistakes did not cause her or her clients to sustain any financial losses. Her solid relationships with her clients were highlighted, and a number of them sent supportive letters to her expressing their appreciation and satisfaction with her work. Notably, she has never before acted inappropriately in a professional setting.

Collaboration and Introspection

Sriranpong volunteered to self-report her actions, and she fully cooperated with the Law Society’s investigation. Recognizing her own responsibility, she made an early move to rectify the problem through a consent agreement throughout the investigation. The consent accord summary emphasizes her contrition and recognition that her actions violated society’s laws.

No prior transgressions

The summary restates the absence of prior instances of professional misconduct for Sriranpong.

The Bottom Line

The Katrina Sriranpong case highlights how important it is for members of the legal profession to behave morally and legally. She did not act deliberately or obtain any financial advantage, although acknowledging that she had misused customer funds and neglected to keep accounting records. She is committed to handle the situation responsibly, as seen by her readiness to collaborate, self-report, and own up to her mistakes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Post

H Bruce Bronson: A Fraudster? (2024)

Next Post

Philip Mongelluzzo Jr: A Fraud? (2024)

Related Posts

Sign Up to Our Newsletter

Be the first to know the latest updates

[yikes-mailchimp form="1"]