Nosy Tarsee hears a certain legal shop — well-regarded, well-connected, the kind that gets called when a client’s name is already in the headlines — has allegedly taken to backdating paperwork like it’s going out of style.

The story goes like this: A property or an account gets flagged, a freeze order looms, and suddenly a “trust deed” surfaces — notarized, dated years before anyone in government thought to ask questions — naming a cousin, a corporate shell or a conveniently loyal employee as the real owner all along. Funny how the paper trail always seems to appear just when the asset does.

A watchdog with a long memory for this sort of thing has reportedly reminded the legal community that while lawyers are expected to defend their clients, creating or fabricating documents to conceal beneficial ownership, if proven, could expose not only the client but also anyone who knowingly participated in the scheme. Falsification of public documents, after all, does not depend on whose letterhead appears on the page.

Nosy Tarsee won’t say which office. Yet.

But if that trust deed’s notarization date fails to withstand closer scrutiny, don’t be surprised if investigators begin asking difficult questions.

Should investigators ultimately establish that a trust deed or related corporate documents were fabricated or backdated, those who prepared, notarized or knowingly used them could face potential criminal liability under the Revised Penal Code, along with possible administrative or disciplinary proceedings, subject to the evidence and the outcome of any investigation.