A “disgraceful” solicitor has been struck off after admitting to dishonestly getting an 89-year-old woman to pay £10,000.

Robert Steven Callen, 70, had only worked as a consultant for Watford law practice Penman Sedgwick from February 2016 to December 2017, but in February 2018 he visited a client of his former employer.

The woman had been left with serious injuries after a crash in 2015, when she was 81, and Mr Callen had been involved in negotiating a settlement of her personal injury claim.

She had received £525,000 and the insurers paid £75,000 towards costs, in December 2017.

During the visit, he told her she needed to pay him £15,000 that she did not really owe, but she refused to pay. However, he returned a few days later to ask for the money again and she agreed.

The “vulnerable” woman handed him her chequebook and he wrote out cheques to his partner, friend, and daughter for a total of £11,000 before the partner and friend’s cheques were cashed for £5,000 each. His daughter’s £1,000 cheque was not paid.

In April that year, the victim told Penman Sedgwick about the payments, saying she wanted her money back, and a senior partner met with her. She then demanded the return of her money from Mr Callen, who posted a cheque for £10,000 through her door.

During a tribunal hearing on June 20, he admitted all allegations. It found his behaviour “disgraceful” and “capable of shattering the trust the public place in solicitors to protect their interests”.

Mr Callen was struck off the roll of solicitors and he agreed to pay costs of £2,574.

Penman Sedgewick explained that, when the client reported the events, it provided her with help and support, and reported the matter.

The firm added: “We provided the Solicitors Regulation Authority with full assistance in carrying out their investigation and we fully support their findings, and the decision that they have made.

“We are particularly shocked and saddened that the misconduct and dishonesty which formed the basis of the allegations against Robert involved a vulnerable client.

“We have no reason to believe that any other clients of the firm have been affected by Robert’s behaviour either during his short time with us or in the years since he left.”