Tara Khan
Employee
7268349

Decision - Employee-related decision

Outcome: Control of non-qualified staff (Section 43 / Section 99 order)

Outcome date: 16 July 2025

Published date: 22 July 2025

Firm details

Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Mackrell

Address(es): 60 St Martins Lane,Covent Garden,LondonWC2N 4JS

Firm ID: 63687

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

Who does this decision relate to?

Ms Tara Khan whose last known address was in Hayes, West London. A person who is or was involved in a legal practice but is not a solicitor. Summary of decision

The SRA has put restrictions on where and how Ms Khan can work in an SRA regulated firm. It was found that:

Ms Khan, who is not a solicitor, was involved in a legal practice and has occasioned or been a party to an act or default which involved such conduct on her part that it is undesirable for her to be involved in a legal practice in any of the ways described in the order below.

The facts of the case

Ms Khan was employed as a conveyancing assistant and later promoted to licensed conveyancer at Mackrell Solicitors, a recognised body (the firm), between August 2021 and February 2024. It was found that during the course of her employment, Ms Khan:

1. 1. When acting on a conveyancing matter
   1. falsified the clients' signature, and signed to say that she had witnessed them sign, on a Mortgage Deed that she submitted to the Land Registry; and
   2. subsequently misled the firm by
      1. stating that she had received an email from the clients in October 2022 attaching the signed (but not witnessed) Deed when this was not true;
      2. falsifying an email which purported to be from the clients attaching the signed Deed and sending it to the firm; and
      3. stating that her supervisor had told her to create a mortgage deed that could be submitted to the Land Registry when this was not true.
2. On or around 18 October 2022 and 17 April 2023, allocated Land Registry charges which misrepresented the clients to be charged.
3. In October 2022, falsified the e-RX1 to indicate the proprietor's consent had been obtained.
4. In June 2024 filed a unilateral e-UN1 notice with HM Land Registry which misrepresented her authority to do so as she was no longer an employee of the firm.

It was also found that Ms Khan's conduct was dishonest.

Decision on outcome

An order pursuant to section 43(2) of the Solicitors Act 1974 was imposed as Ms Khan's conduct meant that it was undesirable for her to be involved in a legal practice without the SRA's prior approval. The order pursuant to section 43 was made with effect from the date of the letter or email notifying Ms Khan of this decision:

Ms Khan's conduct was serious and represents a risk that makes regulatory action via a section 43 order appropriate. Ms Khan falsified documents and correspondence and sought to mislead the firm and HM Land Registry. She also used her employee HM Land Registry portal access to carry out searches and make applications against property owned by her father, on behalf of her mother, without his or the firm's knowledge or consent.

Ms Khan was also ordered to pay a proportion of the SRA's costs of £1,650.

What our Section 43 order means

1. no solicitor shall employ or remunerate her in connection with his/her practice as a solicitor;
2. no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate her in connection with the solicitor's practice;
3. no recognised body shall employ or remunerate her;
4. no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate her in connection with the business of that body;
5. no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit her to be a manager of the body; and
6. no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit her to have an interest in the body except in accordance with the SRA's prior written permission.