A recently qualified solicitor who lied on a job application for a City firm has been struck off the roll. Vishal Patel made false claims about his academic background on a CV which was to be submitted to Squire Patton Boggs for a job as a funds associate in its London office.
A partner with the firm reported the matter to the Solicitors Regulation Authority when background checks uncovered that Patel had made the misleading statements. Following an agreed outcome between Patel and the SRA, he was struck off by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal after a one-day hearing in November.
The tribunal heard that Patel, admitted in September 2020, had been employed as an in-house solicitor at Aviva Insurance when he submitted a CV to recruitment agency Robert Walters for the private practice job.
In respect of his academic qualifications, he stated that he had a first class honours law degree, had achieved a ‘very competent’ level in the Bar Professional Training Course and also had a postgraduate law degree. It also said that he had attended the University of Aston.
Patel was interviewed by the firm and offered a job, subject to pre-employment checks by a third party. These checks revealed discrepancies in the information provided between the CV and a further online screening questionnaire. In the questionnaire, he answered that he had achieved a ‘competent’ grade on the BPTC and LPC and had achieved a 2:1 honours degree in law from Birmingham City University. The checks and a further interview with Patel found he had obtained a 2:2.
Patel said he ‘created a persona that he thought was required for a role in private practice’. Asked whether he had lied or falsified information to get a job, Patel said he had, but it was not a deliberate attempt to mislead.
The SRA said it was clear that the CV contained information that was inaccurate in relation to the educational institutions he studied at, his academic qualifications and his work experience.
In non-agreed mitigation, Patel said he had fully co-operated with the SRA investigation and was committed to rebuilding trust in his professional and personal life. He did not contest the decision to strike him off.
The tribunal said these were serious acts of dishonesty committed over six months which was ‘deliberate and repeated’. Its ruling added: ‘He acted in a way to provide a benefit to himself by providing untrue information about his education and qualifications in order to secure new employment.’
Patel also agreed to pay £5,313 costs.
