mehta wind

Blown away.

A wind turbine manufacturer has removed its in-house counsel after being told that he was struck off months ago.

Wind Energy Solutions (WES) described Neel Mehta as “a highly experienced solicitor” for two months after he was removed from the Roll for committing driving offences and concealing the convictions from the firms at which he worked.

Mehta’s previous employers had an unfortunate habit of remaining in the dark about his misdemeanours despite, according to him, his best intentions.

Ashfords was unaware that Mehta had convictions until the police got in touch with the firm. He told HR he hadn’t bothered flagging his offences with them as he “considered it a personal matter which did not affect his work”.

Keystone Law remained ignorant for 10 months until it discovered that, contrary to representations he made when he joined it, he had criminal convictions and had been investigated by a previous firm and the SRA.

After being sacked he joined WES. In a weird coincidence, it appears to have been similarly ill-informed about its new counsel. 

mehta profile

Hope no big contracts were signed in the interim...

When ROF asked whether it was aware Mehta had been struck off, no response was forthcoming. However, within a couple of days Mehta’s profile vanished. The company did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Mehta did not reply when asked to confirm whether he disclosed to WES he had been struck off, or considered it a personal matter which did not affect his work.

lawyerupLawyerUp lets you receive expressions of interest from top firms and companies when they like you for a role. Join thousands of other legal professionals and grab it on the App Store and Google Play.

Tip Off ROF


Je Suis Monty Don l’Autobus 29 September 23 09:01

You don’t need to be on the roll to be an in house lawyer. Why is this guy being hounded out of jobs he remains qualified for?

Anonymous 29 September 23 09:19

Je suis Monty, there is so much wrong with your comment it’s hard to know if you’re trolling or not.

Given WES was holding him out as a solicitor, the fact he was struck off was probably quite important under the terms of his employment.  



Factualist 29 September 23 09:23

@Je Suis Monty Don l’Autobus

1. You certainly do need to be on the Roll to call yourself a solicitor. Holding out is a criminal offence under the Solicitors Act 1974.

2. You also need to be authorised to carry out reserved activities under the Legal Services Act 2007, which may have formed part of his in-house role. You don't need to be a solicitor per se to be authorised, but I doubt any of the other regulators will have him now. 

3. I imagine his employment contract had something in it about having to be open with his employer about his criminal and regulatory record and to notify them if anything untoward happens. Even if not explicit, there's an implied term of trust and confidence in employment contracts. Given his record, it seems unlikely he was terribly forthcoming with them. 

4. Notwithstanding all of the above, why would you want to employ someone with known honesty issues in a key legal role?

Anon 29 September 23 09:33

Assuming the driving offences weren't too serious, he is being punished not for the driving offences but for concealing those offences. Important lesson for lawyers - just disclose everything.

Toby Greenlord - Freeman in a van 29 September 23 09:53

I've struggled with my short term memory too.

Doctors have suggested some of my personal organic and herbal remedies are having a negative influence on my cognitive abilitards but I'm fine.

Although I must admit I don't always finish what I

OldFart 29 September 23 10:03

Worked alongside this chap some time ago.  Suffice it to say that he was widely viewed as hard work, and not in a good way.  His alleged turpitude is surprising to his former colleagues only in its extent, I imagine.

Je Suis Monty Don l’Aurobus 29 September 23 10:22

1. I did not say “you don’t need to be on the roll to hold yourself out as a solicitor”, so N/A

2. Entirely speculative.

3. Plausible tbf

4. Because he was immediately available and keen for the work?

Walnut whip 29 September 23 12:03

At the centre of of his own mehtaverse gravitating towards his own implosion.

Criminal 29 September 23 13:33

Is that it?  He just leaves and nothing else?  Although, yes, it is a big thing to lose your job, it is all public and what on earth are you going to do next ... it makes me think now that I do not need to disclose anything and the onus is on the employers to go check stuff (hoping that they don't bother).  

WES didn't even bother asking for a DBS certificate which would have shown his convictions. 

WES did not bother to check with the SRA to make sure he had a practice certificate. 

It was the police who tracked him and troubled themselves to contact the firm - and I had no idea that the police had the time to do this, some particular police office must especially like him and be stalking him!  Were it not for that police officer, Mehta would be happily working at WES still.  


Anonymous 29 September 23 13:47

Unlike you lot he has obviously done his research and found a copy of The Manga Carta in the original Japanese.  It's all there on youtube.

The first clause reads "I Am The Law" and therefore he is fully entitled to do whatever he wants as long as he declares himself to be a Freeman On The Land and has a birth certificate.  It's not that he withheld details of these so-called offences.  It's far deeper than that.  He is not subject to these human rules and regulations, only to the divine laws of God.  Therefore he committed no crime.

Heh 29 September 23 14:08

Anon at 1347 - If you knew the guy you'd realise how close to the mark you are.  Or maybe you do...

Criminal 29 September 23 14:16

... and another thing ... how many others are there at WES who have criminal convictions and are struck off?  

Has WES started checking everyone now?  



Related News