Dunphys [002223] and P Simon [6582822] , Disciplinary Panel Decision, 24-26 June 2026

Decision of the Disciplinary Panel

Date of Decision: 24 – 26 June 2026

Case of: Dunphys Surveyors [002223] and Mr P Simon [6582822]

RICS Membership Number: 0852067

Location: Middlesex, UK

Member

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. Robert Stain; 

b. John Burgess; 

c. Peter Stephens; 

d. Sara Persad / NHG; 

e. Ian Bonnett; 

f. Mary Thornhill; 

g. Sean O’Brien; 

h. Dharmesh Mehta. 

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). 

Firm: 

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. John Burgess in that the Firm:

1. Failed to pay rent / money owing to Mr Burgess in a timely manner, or at all;
2. Failed to pay money collected for insurance to the insurer or Mr Burgess in a timely manner or at all;
3. Failed to provide adequate statements relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.
4. Failed to address his complaints or concerns, or those raised on his behalf, adequately, and / or in a timely manner;
5. Failed to ensure deposit(s) for properties no longer managed by the Firm were forwarded as requested within a reasonable time;
6. Continued to make rent demand(s) after the contract was terminated.

b. Peter Stephens in that the Firm:

1. Failed to pay rent owing to Mr Stephens in a timely manner, or at all;
2. Failed to address his complaints or concerns, or those raised on his behalf, adequately, and / or in a time timely manner;
3. Failed to provide adequate statements relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all. 

c. NHG / Sara Persad in that the Firm:

1. Failed to pay rent owing to NHG in a timely manner, or at all;
2. Failed to address complaints or concerns raised by NHG adequately, and / or in a timely manner;
3. Continued to make rent demand(s) after the contract was terminated.
4. Failed to provide adequate statements relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.

d. Ian Bonnett in that the Firm:

1. Failed to pay rent owing to Mr Bonnett in a timely manner, or at all;
2. Failed to address his complaints or concerns, or those raised on his behalf, adequately, and / or in a timely manner;
3. Failed to provide adequate statements / information relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.
4. Failed pay / renew insurance in a timely manner.

e. Mary Thornhill in that the Firm:

1. Failed to pay rent / money owing to Ms Thornhill in a timely manner, or at all;
2. Failed to address her complaints or concerns, or those raised on her behalf, adequately, and / or in a timely manner;
3. Failed to provide adequate statements relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all;
4. 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. Sean O’Brien in that the Firm:

1. In respect of service charge payments paid by or on behalf of Mr Barron, failed to forward these to the new management agent or return them;
2. Failed to make reasonable efforts to assist with the transfer of management to Llewelyn & co;
3. Failed to address Mr O’Brien complaints or concerns adequately, and / or in a timely manner;

g. Dharmesh Mehta in that the Firm:

1. Failed to pay rent owing to Mr Mehta in a timely manner, or at all;
2. Failed to address his complaints or concerns, or those raised on his behalf, adequately, and / or in a time timely manner;
3. Failed to provide adequate statements / information relating the property / properties being managed in a timely manner or at all.
4.  

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. Robert Stain; 

b. John Burgess; 

c. Peter Stephens; 

d. Sara Persad / NHG; 

e. Ian Bonnett; 

f. Mary Thornhill; 

g. Sean O’Brien; 

h. Dharmesh Mehta. 

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; 

1. 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.            Patricia Ford-Hanes and Sheila Curtis 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).

Finding: Proved

Sanction: Removal from Registration with RICS and Expulsion from membership