Disciplinary Panel Hearing        

Case: Dunphys Surveyors [002223] and Paul Simon [6582822], London, WD6

Date: Monday 16 – Friday 27 February 2026

Time: 10:00 hrs GMT    

 

The formal charge against Mr Simon is as follows:

1. Between around 26 September 2022 and 7 March 2024, Paul Simon, in his capacity as Responsible Principal and / or a Director of the Firm, failed to cooperate with RICS in that he failed to provide any or all of the information requested in a timely manner, or at all, in relation to the concerns raised by:

a. RS;

b. JB;

c. PS;

d. SP/ NHG;

e. IB;

f. MT;

g. SOB;

h. DM.

Contrary to Rule 1 of the Rules of Conduct with effect from 2 February 2022.

 

Mr Simon is therefore liable to disciplinary action under RICS Bye-law 5.2.2(c).

 

The formal charges against Dunphys Surveyors are as follows:

2. Dunphys Chartered Surveyors failed to carry out its professional work with proper regard for standards of service and customer care expected of it and / or failed to comply with its professional obligations in relation to the following:

a. JB in that the Firm:

i. Failed to pay rent / money owing to JB in a timely manner, or at all;

ii. Failed to pay money collected for insurance to the insurer or JB in a timely manner or at all;

iii. Failed to provide adequate statements relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.

iv. Failed to address his complaints or concerns, or those raised on his behalf, adequately, and / or in a timely manner;

v. Failed to ensure deposit(s) for properties no longer managed by the Firm were forwarded as requested within a reasonable time;

vi. Continued to make rent demand(s) after the contract was terminated.

b. PS in that the Firm:

i. Failed to pay rent owing to PS in a timely manner, or at all;

ii. Failed to address his complaints or concerns, or those raised on his behalf, dequately, and / or in a time timely manner;

iii. Failed to provide adequate statements relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.

c. NHG / SP in that the Firm:

i. Failed to pay rent owing to NHG in a timely manner, or at all;

ii. Failed to address complaints or concerns raised by NHG adequately, and / or in a timely manner;

iii. Continued to make rent demand(s) after the contract was terminated.

iv. Failed to provide adequate statements relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.

d. IB in that the Firm:

i. Failed to pay rent owing to IB in a timely manner, or at all;

ii. Failed to address his complaints or concerns, or those raised on his behalf, adequately, and / or in a timely manner;

iii. Failed to provide adequate statements / information relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.

iv. Failed pay / renew insurance in a timely manner,

e. MT in that the Firm:

i. Failed to pay rent / money owing to MT in a timely manner, or at all;

ii. Failed to address her complaints or concerns, or those raised on her behalf, adequately, and / or in a timely manner;

iii. Failed to provide adequate statements relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all;

iv. Failed to ensure deposit(s) for property / properties no longer managed by the Firm were forwarded as requested within a reasonable time or at all.

f. SOB in that the Firm:

i. In respect of service charge payments paid by or on behalf of SOB, failed to forward these to the new management agent or return them;

ii. Failed to make reasonable efforts to assist with the transfer of management to Llewelyn & co;

iii. Failed to address SOB complaints or concerns adequately, and / or in a timely manner;

g. DM in that the Firm:

i. Failed to pay rent owing to DM in a timely manner, or at all;

ii. Failed to address his complaints or concerns, or those raised on his behalf, adequately, and / or in a time timely manner;

iii. Failed to provide adequate statements / information relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.

Contrary to Rules 3 and 5 of the Rules of Conduct for Firms version 6 and/or version 7 / Rule 1 and 3 Rules of Conduct (effective from 2 February 2022)

 

The Firm is therefore liable to disciplinary action under RICS Bye-law 5.3.2(c).

3. Between 26 September 2022 and 5 October 2023, Dunphys Chartered Surveyors failed to cooperate with RICS in that it failed to provide any or all of the information requested in a timely manner, or at all, in relation to the concerns raised by:

a. RS;

b. JB;

c. PS;

d. SP / NHG;

e. IB;

f. MT;

g. SOB;

h. DM.

Contrary to Rule 1 of the Rules of Conduct with effect from 2 February 2022

 

The Firm is therefore liable to disciplinary action under RICS Bye-law 5.3.2(c).

4. Between 6 August 2020 and 13 January 2021, Dunphys Chartered Surveyors

failed to cooperate with RICS in that it failed to provide adequate information in

a timely manner that had been reasonably requested by RICS in connection

with a Regulatory Review Visit.

Contrary to Rule 14 of the Rules of Conduct for Firms version 7 with effect from 2 March 2020.

 

The Firm is therefore liable to disciplinary action under RICS Bye-law 5.3.2(c).

5. Between 2 March 2020 and 14 January 2021 Dunphys Chartered Surveyors

(the Firm) failed adequately to safeguard or preserve the security of clients’ money in that:

a. the following of the Firm’s client accounts did not include the word ‘client’ in

their title:

i. Account no xxxxx507 Dunphys Ltd Management Commission Account;

ii. Account no xxxxx550 Dun re 4 Cressys Corner;

iii. Account no xxxxx597 Dun re 487 London Road;

iv. Account no xxxxx754 Dun re Aqua Technologies Ltd.

b. The Firm failed to evidence that regular bank account reconciliations were undertaken for one or more of its client accounts and/or demonstrate that bank account reconciliations were reviewed by a principal or senior staff member of the Firm in that:

i. It was unable to locate the cashbook within the system it used for

accounting and property management purposes;

ii. It was unable to produce historic ledger balances.

c. The Firm’s client ledger balances disclosed the following ledgers were

overdrawn:

i. PFH and SC service charge -£8,926.43;

ii. The Feathers Chester Street Wrexham Limited service charge - £2,896.23;

iii. Warwool Limited service charge -£6,180.00.

d. The Firm was unable to break down the balance of its Deposit Control

Account to show the funds held for each client.

Contrary to Rule 8 of the Rules of Conduct for Firms version 7 with effect from 2 March 2020.

 

The Firm is therefore liable to disciplinary action under RICS Bye-law 5.3.2(c).

 

Anyone wishing to attend should contact:           

  

Jae Berry
Regulatory Tribunal Manager
jberry@rics.org