SHOW US THE BOOKS
Toronto personal injury lawyer will face a tribunal hearing over allegations he didn’t fully co-operate with investigation when he failed to produce his firm’s financial records
Personal injury lawyer Jeremy Diamond is facing professional misconduct allegations from the Law Society of Upper Canada that he failed to produce financial records from the Diamond & Diamond firm, law society documents reveal.
The high-profile Toronto lawyer — his firm’s slogan is “Nothing is tougher than a diamond” — is alleged to have failed to fully co-operate with an investigation by failing to produce the financial books and records of Diamond & Diamond. He has been asked to provide records four times over the past seven months, according to the law society’s notice of application in the case.
“A lawyer who fails to co-operate with an investigation interferes with the law society’s ability to carry out its mandate to protect the public,” said Susan Ton- kin, spokesperson for the law society.
In an email to the Star, Diamond’s lawyer Kris Borg-Olivier maintained his client has responded “in detail” to every letter he has received from the law society and that he has “co-operated with the law society throughout the process of its investigations, and will continue to do so.” Borg-Olivier did not respond to the Star’s questions about the nature of the probe.
“Mr. Diamond is a lawyer in good standing with the Law Society, as are all 18 lawyers at Diamond & Diamond,” Borg- Olivier wrote.
What the law society is specifically investigating that led to the requests for records, it won’t say.
Lawyers are self-regulated in Ontario and must, when asked, provide law society investigators with access to their records. In its notice of application, the law society also alleges that dating as far back as Oct. 1, 2013, Diamond has failed to maintain “some of the required books and records for his law firm.” Spokesperson Tonkin explained that one allegation relates to the maintenance of records “with respect to (a lawyer’s) handling of money in connection with their professional business.”
A hearing has been scheduled in front of the Law Society Tribunal on July14 to determine if by his actions, Diamond has engaged in “professional misconduct.” If the allegations are proven, Diamond could face a fine, suspension or a revocation of his licence to practice law.
An ongoing Star investigation has examined Diamond & Diamond’s practice in past years of bringing in clients with an aggressive advertising campaign and then referring many out to other lawyers in return for sometimes hefty referral fees.
The Star also found that many clients, including accident victims, have often been in the dark about referrals and the fees associated with them. In its response to the Star, Diamond & Diamond maintains it has a growing roster of lawyers who handle cases in house.
The announcement of the conduct investigation was posted to the Law Society Tribunal’s website on Wednesday.
In the brief statement of allegations, the law society alleges Diamond has not followed a bylaw that requires lawyers to “record all money and other property received and disbursed in connection with the licencee’s professional business.”
The law society also alleges Diamond has “failed to maintain . . . some of the required books and records for his law firm” and that he has “failed to fully co-operate with an investigation of the law society regarding his professional conduct by failing to produce information and documentation.”
The law society states that it has been asking for information from Diamond for seven months, in letters to him dated Oct. 17, 2016; Dec. 13, 2016; Feb. 14, 2017; and Apr. 3, 2017.
Diamond & Diamond’s high public profile has come from strong advertising campaigns — billboards, radio ads during sports events, sports sponsorships and even advertise- ments atop urinals at the Air Canada Centre.
In 2013, Diamond was cautioned for “misleading advertising” following a complaint by another personal injury lawyer. A report setting out the law society’s findings in that case says that the evidence suggested Diamond, as spokesperson for Diamond & Diamond, “made statements on the law firm’s website and on radio and TV marketing spots that were not demonstrably true, accurate or verifiable.”
The Star’s ongoing investigation focused on a variety of law firms, revealing that the world of personal injury advertising is like a “wild west,” with many lawyers apparently breaking rules designed to prevent false and misleading marketing.
In February, the law society accepted recommendations from one of its committees to crack down on questionable advertising by giving lawyers clearer guidance on what kind of marketing breaks the rules and by prohibiting lawyers from advertising services they do not intend to provide.
Following stories on the practice of lawyers at various firms referring out cases as a mode of business, the law society also approved several measures to make the referral process more transparent, including a sliding cap on referral fees and a mandatory agreement that all parties will have to sign before a referral can take place.
The Star has asked Diamond on several occasions over the past few months to detail his referral fees and reveal intake and referral numbers, but he declined. Julian Porter, who represented Diamond when the Star was originally asking questions, said that while the firm does refer out some cases, “Diamond & Diamond currently represents thousands of clients . . . these are retainers with the firm, in respect of which Diamond & Diamond lawyers represent the clients and prosecute the cases.”
The regulation of lawyers specializing in the personal-injury field has been a major focus of the law society in the past year. With referral fees and advertising dealt with, and as a part of new reforms to protect the public, the law society said in April that it will now turn its attention to contingency-fee agreements — the “you don’t pay unless we win” system used often in personal-injury cases. The law society is considering creating a standard agreement for all Ontario lawyers that would specify to clients how much a lawyer can take in fees.