Hilarious.

The "I'm so edgy, look at my tattoos and I swear" persona was all over LinkedIn.

Those who can, do.

Those who can't, teach

And spaff all over linkedin about how edgy they are

Absolutely fascinating - had always wondered how much substance there was behind the relentless self-promotion.

Had met a number of new clients who had used them, all complained of poor responsiveness and underwhelming service, but I wondered if that was a firm being a victim of it's own success and drowning in too much work. Apparently not, it was actually a sign of a firm that was just a big marketing machine with no lawyers behind it.

Pushy sales persona. I became aware of her and the firm a couple of years ago, and could see through the self-hype immediately. It's insufferable.

Alice is up there on LinkedIn with the "at least i tried" story - which is great, and it is commendable, but when you take £600k from your own company in loans, and fail to pay £800k in tax, its completely fair that questions are asked.

We do need entrepreneurs and people to challenge the status quo - but we don't need "fake it to you make it" bu11shit. The "plume" phoenix is not a success story....

While I am very sorry that her business has failed, as a follower of hers and others of her ilk, this does not surprise me at all. There are many attractive, apparently well-meaning but nauseating Millennial and Zoomer “Woke” lady “Lawfluencers” on social media who post more about their holidays, tattoos, mental health, single motherhood, wellness, “women’s health issues”, diversity, inclusivity, equity and vague Zoomer “Motherhood and Apple Pie” advice for the Instagram Generation.

In her talk at Legal Cheek a few weeks ago, “The Power of the Human Lawyer” available to view online, she talks about EVERYTHING BUT how to create and sustain a profitable legal business and instead harps on about how life in the corporate world prevented her from being her “authentic self”. Where’s the beef? How is this “advice” helping businesses to make money for themselves and their clients? The only measurable outcome that I can see is that it has turned LinkedIn into a cringefest.

Ultimately, this is yet another sad example of “Get Woke, Go Broke”. Maybe now there is a gap opening up in the legal training influencer market for some toxic alpha cis hetro patriarchal advice on how to stop focussing on your social media “personal brand” and actually GET! IT! DONE!….?

I suspect this business failure is as a result of the extraordinary extreme narcissism of the firms founder. To be fair I don’t know who her/their clients were/are, but I suspect
that focusing on tattoos (almost obsessively) and the cult of ‘Alice’ is probably much to do with the demise. It will be interesting to see how clients rate the new iteration in terms of service delivery and results!

So British taxpayers are out of pocket to the tune of £819,000 due to unpaid PAYE and VAT. I just read her recent LinkedIn post, and it's filled with sycophantic replies from "life coaches" and "legal industry disruptors" praising her and saying she hasn't done anything wrong, despite Stephenson Law leaving an almost £1,000,000 deficiency behind. Jesus wept.

If most of the debt is to her other companies and she admits she will pay the directors loan back - why is anyone attacking her. Could it be cos she doesn’t fit inside a box?!

This is the type of person getting lauded in modern culture. Completely self-absorbed, obsessed with diversity nonsense, spends half the time engaging in nauseating self-promotion on social media, then it turns out they’re basically a fraud. Next!

“ I’m Alice and I’m the Founder & CEO of Plume, a UK legal practice which I’ve grown to … £9 cash at hand”

She is well known in the Bristol market, for years we watched and wondered, lots of social media content, but if you looked closely it was all fart, no poo. And the business accounts showed poor numbers for years. We assumed she was pumping it up ahead of a sale and exit.

The unregulated thing is a worry, lots of other new 'law firms' popping up, not doing litigation or transactions and so not requiring as ABS licence. Agility is great etc, but after the Axiom fiasco I'm not sure we need more scat.

If you (understandably) want to avoid the corporate grind, just go and work for / use Keystone or similar.

I once met the manager of a very successful rock band. At one point in our conversation he told me he would never engage a lawyer or an accountant who had tattoos, wore leather trousers or carried an aluminium briefcase. He was, of course, tattooed, wearing leather trousers and using an aluminium briefcase. What did I expect him to look like? A lawyer?

@Popcorn, 11:06 - *c.1/4 is to her other companies, and even if the directors loan is repaid in full, she's still short almost £500k. That's bad enough, but the real question is how and why can someone let this happen and still be allowed to run other law firms with even less SRA regulation?

I've worked across from what was Stephenson's Law multiple times and have always found them to be very good. The subscription model is also a genuinely good idea (hardly innovation of the decade of course, but as an in houser it's the sort of cost certainty that makes life much easier).

Shame to see the public purse out of pocket, but it's not like business reorg is unusual at scale ups in the majority of industries. This seems like a storm in a teacup to me. Good luck to them.

“ If most of the debt is to her other companies and she admits she will pay the directors loan back - why is anyone attacking her. Could it be cos she doesn’t fit inside a box?!”

Hi Alice!

Looking at the amount owed to HMRC for PAYE and going on an average number of staff of 30 (which believe in reality ended up around more like 15) it's safe to assume the PAYE hasn't been paid for at least 18 months, yet all the while she has been promoting her 'successful business', charging for talks about how to set up a successful law business, and publish a book knowing her own business is failing to point of no return, owing hundreds of thousands of ££ to HMRC, ultimately impacting all of us.... dont believe the LinkedIn hype, guys! Have seen this coming for months....

A simple solution here would have been for Stephenson Law to merge with Stephenson Harwood. They could even have changed the name to Stephenson Law Harwood. Has a certain ring to it. And to keep “in brand”, all SH partners would need to get tribal neck tattoos. I see no downsides to this strategy, SH could’ve settled the tax bill too and paid Alice £600k a year forever.

@11:05 - it's bizarre isn't it? Brand yourself as disruptive, wave away all criticism as The Privileged Ones attacking you for changing things, and people will wilfully blind themselves to anything you do wrong. No matter how egregious.

Ol' Prags should go to her for PR advice perhaps?

Noticed how Sahar was supporting her on LinkedIn this morning. Another one who loves to post yet doesn't have any judgments published on Bailli.

So basically she's mugging off the taxpayer and her law firm has failed, despite all her self promotion of how successful she is/was?

I always laughed when she was all over LinkedIn talking about tattoos. Nobody cares. Maybe she couldn't make it in the legal profession or as a law firm owner because she isn't actually very good?

Public service announcement - having a tattoo is not a personality or a business plan.

Now where can I buy her book?

I remember not too long ago, Alice announced the Plume rebrand and tried to spin it as a good thing while conveniently leaving out the truth about the tepid financials of Stephenson Law. This is precisely why you don’t listen to 99.9% of the BS from these law influencers

This woman appears to have used a law firm as a side show to promote herself relentlessly which of course is hardest on their clients and their own people. Narcissistic beyond belief - shades of Trump!

Far be it for me to provide advice to such a well-established legal name and adviser of other lawyers (really?) as our Alice but, hey, here's a few suggestions:

1) Spend more time on and pay more attention to looking after clients' interests and less (much less) on self-publicity. The best publicity is securing a successful conclusion for a client and the repeat work and recommendations that flow from it.

2) Spend more time on managing you own business efficiently instead of advising others on how you think they might manage theirs. I love a bit of irony though there are those who might not think that liquidating a company with £800k of debts is such a great basis from which to advise others.

3) Maybe try to focus on (i) either being a lawyer or (ii) doing other things. It's challenging enough to manage a practice and undertake client work well without having to tend to the needs of all those other activities.

4) Manage cashflow so that as liabilities are incurred you have the funds available to cover them. Mr Micawber was right

Footnote: It's interesting to note how many overseas law firms/professional advisers are on the list of creditors of Stephenson Law.

One has to wonder why ?

I think i read somewhere that the oversees creditors are small firms of trademark attorneys. If you're going to be a global smash, you need to make sure your brand is protected globally.

I can think of at least three similar other "new age" firms who wont be around by the end of the next year. There'll be loads of "fee share" firms going pop too. Too many are all fur coat and no knickers... or rather all marketing and sales, and no operational substance.

4) Manage cashflow so that as liabilities are incurred you have the funds available to cover them. Mr Micawber was right

I think this poster may not quite have understood Mr. Micawber's approach....

Plume = feather. Lightweight and the slightest zephyr will send it tumbling away.

Yet again - a law firm fails owing c. £1m in tax. And where the actual fvck was the SRA? Guys - you really need to put these kind of firms into intensive/expensive care when they start to look that ill...otherwise the profession/taxpayer ends up paying the bill for someone's tattooing...

Until just now I never knew that there was such a thing as a "Law Influencer". I feel that, up to that point, I was very privileged indeed. 

No doubt the SRA will be looking the other way, and concentrating their efforts on more important things such as investigations of a bit of malarkey at Christmas Parties.

Wauw, such keyboard bravery! A few questions:
1) Have you ever founded a law firm or business? Are you that big of an expert in business that you can justify your assessment of this is all based on 3-4 scraps of information and hear-say? 2) Please imagine that this would be about a man. Alex instead of Alice if you may. Would it get as much attention from you? Would you judge as harshly? PS: if one or two questions provoke an emotion: maybe add the book 'Biased' to your Christmas wishlist

Al1ce, I think dear old Prags is getting just as much stick for his S*1thousery... I suspect the house of cards has already fallen a bit late for the faux indignation.

Nicky 08 December 23 15:54

Wauw, such keyboard bravery! A few questions:
1) Have you ever founded a law firm or business? Are you that big of an expert in business that you can justify your assessment of this is all based on 3-4 scraps of information and hear-say? 2) Please imagine that this would be about a man. Alex instead of Alice if you may. Would it get as much attention from you? Would you judge as harshly? PS: if one or two questions provoke an emotion: maybe add the book 'Biased' to your Christmas wishlist

to answer the questions, no most ppl here haven't started businesses because they recognise they don't have the aptitude for it or are too risk-averse, like many lawyers. the reason it's a story and has attracted these comments is because of the hubris of Alice Stephenson pontificating at great length about how she was reinventing the world of the law firm while the wheels were falling off her own.

playing the sexist card is feeble - i don't remember that this board or others were that kind when that other lawfluencer Eli Albrecht (American M&A lawyer who was constantly spamming about how involved he is with his kids despite bossing the BigLaw world) downsized his ambitions.

Having worked there, not surprised! Oh the stories…

@Ex-employee 17.20 you can leave us hanging...have a heart we're all vested in this sordid saga after having been spammed endlessly about the tatoos and how she was the reincarnated Joan of Arc...

Unpaid tax bills, suppliers out of pocket and overrecruiting then making staff redundant at the drop of a hat, while taking £600k out of the business, all appear to just be part of the “founder’s journey”.

How do you run up that sort of debt in 7 years?

How much is the book - How To Drive A Law Firm To The Brink Of Insolvency And Beyond.

Yep stories should be told!

Unless they are very mundane

The absolute narcissism and ego of this woman every day on LinkedIn is just grim. Here’s my tattoos, my kids, me in hospital, I was a teenage mum, I have tattoos, please adore me. I’m challenging the status quo.  
[…] it’s good to see so many people agree and see through this vacuous BS. It’s also embarrassing for the real female legends, millions of them, who do far much more and far nicer people than this narcissist, but who don’t go online every 5 seconds spouting crap.

Funny that she only made a post on LinkedIn after ROF and LC forced her hand. 

No comments about the gigantic tax liability accruing, loan to herself for over £0.5m, or tax evasion allegations? 

Many law firms in developing countries are listed as creditors, so much for eSg. 

She's also a Kate Middleton fan to make things worse (Alice defended her after Kate was accused of racism by showing solidarity on LinkedIn lol, when the allegations haven't been disproven or proven, that's as bad as being a fan of Meghan Markle.

There are so many lawyers on LinkedIn who don't even practice law. They are just marketing people who are the face of the firm. In the US we have the same thing - lawyers who don't do any of the actual practice, but just post about: 1) the latest book they read on leadership; 2) the last legal conference they attended; or 3) some fluff about how they were once a drug addict living out of their car who made it big (probably all a lie). Meanwhile I made $150k in legal fees from settlements in December alone. But then I am a trial lawyer, and insurance companies know I will try a case.

Another [...] selling hopes and dreams for 499 to 1000 quid a go. I started my own solo practice and people - get this - gave me advice and tips for free. I do the same thing. Charging for advice is a big red flag. Unfortunately so many gullible people are parted from their money.

Alice Stephenson seems to be the Elizabeth Holmes of the legal world. Full of great phrases and terminology but little substance.

Savage commentary. Alice has inspired a lot of women in legal to be visible for who they are, authentically, without apology. It seems too many are still not comfortable with that. I do wonder if the narrative would be quite as damning and demeaning if it was a male founder? She has some good stats on all this in her book by the way. And I wish we would not not diminish people who find personal growth online. For some it is a really powerful journey.

You know, for all of you who resent seeing her so much on LinkedIn, that’s a choice you know. You don’t have to follow, and you can mute. If it is so unbearable. You’re welcome!

@ Anonymous 08 December 23 11:42

Which band was it? And why didn't he want leather trousers, tattoos or a flashy briefcase.

I love how her posts neglects to mention how Stephenson Law or her related unregulated companies intend to plug their HMRC tax gap. I say go after her as director and make her personally liable for her negligence. We didn’t realise that HMRC “might” demand immediate payment of tax liabilities seems a weak argument. Aren’t you supposed to be a “trailblazer”. Own your mistakes at least rather than deflecting onto others. I’m a woman by the way but I found the LinkedIn post falls on deaf ears.

Most recent posting from Ms Stephenson on LinkedIn:

"There are a million cheap seats in the world today filled with people who will never be brave with their own lives, but will spend every ounce of energy they have hurling advice and judgement at those of us trying to dare greatly. Their only contributions are criticisms, cynicism, and fear-mongering.

If you're criticising from a place where you're not also putting yourself on the line, I'm not interested in your feedback."

Brené Brown

@Ex-employee...I suspect you are as surprised as I am. Whoever you are!

Out of time, out of luck, out of money.

As someone else who used to work there, I’ll just say that the public/LinkedIn self aggrandising didn’t match the reality. Which is why 75% of staff left or were let go within about 12 months. Head count has gone from about 40 down to 10 or so. But can see from the LinkedIn replies, she’s still managed to hoodwink a lot of people while failing to address the amount of money taken out of the business

Search Stephenson Law at companies house - looks quite complex which is never a good sign.

I set up in the 90s. I have never paid a bill late ever. I have never paid HMRC late. I am doing my VAT today. I may be dull but I have no debts of any kind. I am also a sole trader, have never had a complaint and do not even reduce tax through a limited company...
She chaired a meeting to wind it up in Amsterdam in Nov. The company that controls it SLHQ holdings was incorporated in 2023.
Various name changes for the approx 3 companies I found....

I did not support the Clementi reforms and do not like ASBs. I would even prefer it if all law firms were partnerships or sole traders. It always seems unfair to me that those of us who are fully regulated now compete with all kinds of others who avoid all the regulation and cost.

About as surprised about this as Eve Cornwell dropping out of fee earning early doors.

Mmmmm it now seems she (or her supporters at least) are accusing ROF and LC of sexism for pointing out her firm has gone bust.

I don't think paying your taxes is a sexist. Surely we should all be doing that?

Interesting post on TikTok from Ms Stephenson;

https://www.tiktok.com/@alice_e_stephenson/video/7310974834870209824?lang=en

all these supportive comments on LinkedIn (admittedly curated - as Alice has deleted some of the more negative ones). It is so depressing. If these people applied any critical thinking, or just asked "what would I advise a client", they'd recognise how dangerous this situation is for her. Alice, if you're reading this then I hope there is someone in your life who can give you objective advice and not just cheer you on on social media. It looks very much like a textbook case of putting assets beyond creditors. As someone noted above, she herself called out the fact that there are no clients in this entity - where did they go, Alice, and why? When did you start migrating clients, employees, and cash (?) out of the insolvent entity?

I think a lot of these comments are unfair.

The reality is that starting a business requires taking risk. Most news businesses fail.

It is very common for small business to fail while owing money to HMRC in respect of VAT and PAYE.

You only have to read the comments to understand why the US economy has been vastly more successful than the UK economy in recent years. In the US, taking business risk is respected. In the UK, you have a bunch of nitwits who wouldn't know how to run a business if it came and bit them on the bum droning on about how they always pay their debts.

@Anonymous 11.14 - good to see a level of humility when getting asked, and failing to respond to, legitimate questions about her business’ finances

@buzzkill I can see the temptation to think that way, and indeed that's the narrative that Alice has put forward on LinkedIn. If she had acknowledged her business failure earlier then I would have a lot of sympathy for her. But the following facts do not at all support that narrative.
- She publicly announced the launch of "Plume" as a rebrand of Stephenson Law. There is/was even a Q&A on why now was the right time to rebrand. The reality, we now know, was that SL had failed and that Plume is a new venture. She only acknowledged the reality once outed by ROF and LC.
- Evidently this has been a long time coming. They spun off their IP business earlier in the year, presumably ahead of relaunching under Plume (unregulated entity)
- Alice has acknowledged that all the clients and client money and employees are in Plume. Plume's website talks about the awards they've won; such employees as are left have employment histories on LinkedIn going back years as "Plume". Obviously, this is all Stephenson Law history as Plume until recently was a shell co
- The inference is surely she moved all the assets out of the insolvent entity, leaving HMRC and other creditors (including solo / SME IP practitioners) behind as unsecured creditors
- She has taken out £600k in total in loans from the business

She has said she is the first to hold her hand up but clear that is not true

Surely you can see that the above facts are not the "at least I gave it a shot / man in the arena" story

Not trying to be patronising, but if you're not familiar with these areas you could check out this article on the risk of transferring assets out from an insolvent entity https://www.gannons.co.uk/insights/insolvency-risks-intra-company-transfers/

"...director disqualification for between 2-15 years, personal liability to contribute to all or part of the company’s debts, a fine and possibly even being criminally prosecuted for fraud."

Saying Alice is a role model and trailblazer is like saying Lance Armstrong, Barry Bonds and Ben Johnson are the GOATs of their sport. Whether male or female you don't get to be a con artist and then say everyone is a hater for calling you out. I also think one ought to be able to tell the different between taking a risk and defrauding creditors and HMRC.

Ex-employees, wasnt Alice always going on about being a human lawyer? Were you in her book?

The Statement of Affairs signed by Alice Stephenson with a Statement of Truth shows unpaid VAT and PAYE (over 800k) and a massive loan to her of company money (over 660k and with recovery of that from you designated "uncertain"). She will have deducted PAYE from employees wages and collected VAT from her clients and not have paid those sums to HMRC all whilst loaning herself 660k. Further, there is no mention of WIP or Goodwill in the company assets and those assets would normally be recovered for the benefit of the creditors. That she has set up a new company to continue to trade suggests that those assets may now reside there. The questions is whether anything was paid for them. There is definitely more to see here and I cant see that the IP has a choice but to Bankrupt Alice Stephenson unless that loan is paid back.

I fully agree I have no idea how to run a business (so I don't, I am a lawyer)

That said, I don't sell books on how to run a business

Which seems a bit flawed

Tbf Lydia is right on this

Last accounts of Stephenson Law on companies house for year end 31 March 2022 show that in that financial year her directors loan increase from 482,438 to 577,334 and the tax debt increased from 351,883 to 714,202. So it looks that tax debt and directors loan account were already significant and then rose further.

So all those boring old people were right all along - people with tattoos are better suited to crappy coaching companies and self promotion than leading serious businesses. Thanks Alice!

buzzkill @11/12 12:26

The point I think is not that she failed, which we all do at some point to varying degrees. It's that her business failed when she was telling everyone how great it was and how she was bringing something new and exciting to the law which others have been too scared to try. The impression people get is that she was actually faking it till she was making it, and the fakery was using others as an example of why she was just better.

buzzkill 11 December 23 12:26

I think a lot of these comments are unfair.

The reality is that starting a business requires taking risk. Most news businesses fail.

It is very common for small business to fail while owing money to HMRC in respect of VAT and PAYE.

You only have to read the comments to understand why the US economy has been vastly more successful than the UK economy in recent years. In the US, taking business risk is respected. In the UK, you have a bunch of nitwits who wouldn't know how to run a business if it came and bit them on the bum droning on about how they always pay their debts

Well maybe, but the directors of those businesses rarely trumpet their achievements on LinkedIn, somehow suggesting they are better than those who work hard for an organisation.

Owing HMRC because you have paid salaries or suppliers in days in preference is one thing, but paying yourself anticipated dividends in the form of a loan while not paying for teachers nurses and other public services is fairly despicable

Anonymous 11 December 23 11:14

Interesting post on TikTok from Ms Stephenson;

https://www.tiktok.com/@alice_e_stephenson/video/7310974834870209824?lang=en

That is outrageous - will she say that to the mothers of children who have lost out on £600,000 of cancer drugs?

Take a step back, analyse the facts objectively - does anyone else feel taken for a fool?

Mazars are valuing the total assets expected realisations at £2 so they are not that certain she will repay the £666k she took from the business, did she pay PAYE on the loan?

Owed to the bank £179k secured, to the taxman £820k preferential, owed to regular creditors £86k, owed CBILS/funding circle £50k TOTAL £1.135m plus owed to related parties £431k TOTAL DEBTS £1.566m

Fees to come out, if she repays the loan we as the taxpayer are still out by £0.5m and the unsecured creditors get nothing. Did she not realise when she took that loan it was being financed by her suppliers, unsecured lender and mainly by us the taxpayer?

"Disillusioned with the culture of traditional law firms and frustrated by the systemic issues within the industry, I wanted to create an alternative law firm that does things differently.

We are growing rapidly and are on a mission to build a forward-thinking, innovative law firm which puts people at the heart of everything it does. How am I doing it?

By tackling each stereotype head- on, working hard and constantly learning."

@HB - and there it is, playing the gender card, as if we all hate women. Plenty of equally narcisstic and irritating men on LinkedIn spouting the same egotistical nonsense believe me. She hasn't broken boundaries at all, shes not breaking down barriers. She's had hard times, like 99% of us, but like 1% of us she constantly whinges and self-promotes and craves people to lover her as she posts her family albums, like anyone remotely cares.
Clearly if she was a brilliant lawyer (like so many women are, by the way) she'd be successful. Which she is not.

Stop with the gender nonsense. If it looks like a turd and smells like a turd, it's probably a turd.

now she runs a "lawfirm" whilst being non practicing and non regulatory and then slating lawfirms and lawyers. The law gazette even allows her to write an article in it.

what is the world coming to !

"Stephenson said the firm owed a large amount to HMRC which it had been paying back every month, but HMRC chose to call the whole debt in, which forced the business into liquidation. There were no staff, clients or client money in the business.

A statement of affairs published on Companies House by liquidator Mazars LLP states that around £820,000 was owed to HMRC. The tax agency is listed as a preferential creditor but no assets are available to pay back this debt. There is also an £1.57m shortfall in money owed to non-preferential creditors." Law society Gaz today

I don't think it is fair to say people "drone on" about always paying debts. Things like paying what is due are very important particularly for solicitors. She might find it more useful to others to put up a post about how there was such a large debt to HMRC. Each month I put into a separate account the money I will need for VAT and tax like many women (and men) who set up in business.

The earlier post above about how did it come to it that those of us who now pay the highest burden of tax for 70 years are paying for this (we bear the HMRC loss of course so she has robbed us in that sense) - how the transfers if any between the two businesses took place.

She could write posts about how the contracts/clients etc were moved over (if indeed they were) duties to the first entity which I assume was a limited company etc.

@Robyn - thanks for your super eloquent comment. Fact is the legal profession still lacks visible, relatable role models. Her story was about overcoming adversity, and that resonated with a lot of women clearly, especially those wanting to find a place in legal but feeling like they don’t fit the corporate mould. I receive at least two or three messages a month from women in law who have been treated unfairly by their firms. One just this week terminated illegally for having caring responsibilities. So having someone standing out so brightly and boldly to say they were creating change gave people hope that this could enable cultural change. Whilst the business story quite rightly flags up a heap of questions there is a systemic issue which creates the kind of “cult’ following she had grown. So, I won’t stop with “the gender nonsense.” Just using this term tells me all I need to know where you sit in the equality debate.

Another TikTok response from Alice Stephenson to the comment:

https://www.tiktok.com/@alice_e_stephenson/video/7311665085804514592

@Re “a turd is a turd” (nice, by the way) - "Fact is the legal profession still lacks visible, relatable role models. Her story was about overcoming adversity, and that resonated with a lot of women clearly, especially those wanting to find a place in legal but feeling like they don’t fit the corporate mould. I receive at least two or three messages a month from women in law who have been treated unfairly by their firms. One just this week terminated illegally for having caring responsibilities. So having someone standing out so brightly and boldly to say they were creating change gave people hope that this could enable cultural change. " All precisely why this is so awful. She held herself out as a role model and driver of change, while not only bankrupting her business, but much more importantly, presenting what happened [without being transparent about that] (and then telling anyone who questioned her to f*ck off via LinkedIn). [...] You can't just minimise this while saying at least she was a role model. It's sad indeed because she has misled so many. A false prophet. Here are some examples of genuine female role models in the legal sector - Sarah Walker-Smith - Dana Denis-Smith - Mary Bonsor - Georgia Dawson etc etc etc

People who are not trolls do not like the ‘im being trolled’ reaction when legitimate questions are being asked.

If you’re genuinely the ‘first person to put your hands up and admit’ then why not explain how the commentors have got this wrong.

Most of the comments above are not about tattoos and women - they are about someone who is selling the manual but appears to have fallen short. The concerns are not around business failure per se, they are about the conduct around lending a a shareholder buckets of cash and then not having the funds to pay monies due.

There are loads of great female in law - Lydia is one of them - a single mum who has a successful firm.

This isn’t about criticising trying - it’s criticising the attempt to control the narrative that you’re the victim of trolling. The victims are the people (including the public purse) who haven’t been paid - and rubbing their noses in it with the narrative that no one likes a successful tattooed woman is treating your audience like they are idiots.

SRA asleep at the wheel yet again.

Dear anon - I did not say she was a role model. I said the industry lacks them still and her story of overcoming adversity clearly chimed with the many women in law looking at someone they could relate to. And yes I agree many of these women who are in fact good friends of mine are outstanding role models making a real business impact. But still, we lack equality, we lack visibility and the whole uncomfortable narrative around this makes me realise we are even further back than I thought.

Please use spellchecker before posting. You misspelt ‘cult following’.

“Tells me all I need to know about where you sit on gender equality”. Clearly it doesn’t, as I’m hugely supportive of strong, independent career minded women and the equality that they absolutely should get. I’m married to one after all.

What cannot abide is this constant ego and narcissism begging the world to adore her when clearly she hasn’t actually achieved much. Sadly this is what she will always be remembered for, rather than anything of note.

Right, I’m off to LinkedIn, hopefully another picture of her kids or even better what she had for breakfast and how the porridge was stronger and more meaningful than your average cereal, because it was made by her fair hands.

23 18:29

@Robyn - thanks for your super eloquent comment. Fact is the legal profession still lacks visible, relatable role models.

No it doesn’t, it always has had such role models. Read for example Patrick Devlin’s autobiography in which he explains walking his family around the RCJ to point out the fabulous advocates of the era.

I remember doing the same with my family dying my pupillage, pointing out the names on the boards outside of chambers’ front doors. A free and easy way of showing off the role models.

Why were they role models - not because of the nonsense they posted but the cases they were involved in and the arguments they made.

Old fashioned maybe, Dickensian perhaps - but that’s really not the criticism you think it is.

This isn't about the profession lacking strong female leaders. That was put to bed with Lady Hale a few years back. The imbalance isn't perfect but lots of progress has been made in recent times. The issue isn't about gender. It's the fact she has blown her own trumpet for a considerable length of time and been found out for lacking business skills. You can't issue a book about being great at what you do and escape criticism when you run a company into the ground.

Yes you sound like the perfect male champion - lucky us, signed women in law, everywhere.