The apprentice is very often decided on the CV. Who best fits the job SAS has available is crucial. You can usually tell that from the CV people walk in with. Michelle had experience setting up overseas contracts which was her assigned job. Simon was sent off to work on a job that required someone to mix with people like Simon. Lee has got a job selling TV screens - which is a combination of Dixons salesman and advertising manager for a small radio station - talking to people in the transport industry which is hardly known for finesse.

If it was based on what people did and ability shown in the tasks Lee would not have made the final .

The fact is, the lie Lee told on his CV didn't matter one jot to his past achievements or his ability to do the job.

He said he was at uni for 2 years before dropping out. It was actually 4 months. So what? Yes, he lied. He shouldn't have. But what difference does the truth make to his ability to be the apprentice?

The answer is - no difference at all. SAS said so himself - that it was an unnecessary lie. Who cares if you dropped out of uni after 2 years or 2 weeks? That lie on his CV was hardly what got him onto the tv show was it? Do people actually expect SAS to turn round and say "oh I thought you were at uni for 2 years before dropping out. that was the reason I saw you as a potential apprentice. i can't hire you now"?

Does anyone really think that the producers of the programme didn't check everyones CV when they were accepted on to the programme so were well aware of the lie - & how relevant was it that he had gone on a catering course to the position he was applying for - it wasn't - once you reach a certain age in business they worry less about your qualificatons & more about whether you can do the job

The eagle eyed will have noticed the date on the letter from Thames Valley University was August 2007 which is when they would have short listed the potential candidates and were checking their references and claims - so it wasnt the interviewer who happened to contact Thames Valley just prior to the interview, the researchers already knew that was false information before they took him on.

I can hardly believe that SAS has hired such a despicable character ...

Not for the CV "mal adjustments", but for the whole persona ... *shudders*

I'm not really sure I can, or would want to sit and watch another series of The Apprentice.

Who says you have to be nice in business, tonight's results has shown me otherwise ....

It doesn't matter now.
He got the job.
Time alone will tell if he is any good at it.

Lee certainly had his faults but not all of us are perfect. He won't lie on a CV again I'm sure, he apologised to Sara for what he said to her, he may have been a bit sidetracked by Alex on occasions but what did he actually do that was so despicable?

The fact is, most people tweak their CVs slightly to make themselves look better. Lee was the best candidate for me, he could sell anything to anyone and gets a job done with enthusiasm.

Really I don't think they should have accepted his application form in the first place with all those spelling mistakes. I'm always told most employers bin CVs with spelling mistakes and errors - surely they had so many applications for the Apprentice that it would be the first thing they would do to narrow down the number of applicants. I mean this is a 100k job - I'm shocked the application process to be a candidate isn't more strict!

I noticed there was just one paragraph highlighted out of what looked like a 100 page dossier - I wonder if it was just that one paragraph that was missed when he went through it to check or if the whole thing was the same.

My son has a genetic disorder that means he has quite bad problems with writing and spelling and is doing a course at college which has a huge amount of written work but he spell checks everything and then gets someone else to check through again to pick up any that got missed out. He was astounded when he saw Lee's application as although he understands the problems he may have with spelling, he didn't understand how he could send it in unchecked.

Time should tell

Lee nearly walked, last night and it was only Claire backing him up which prevented it

When the going gets tough, we will see whether he gives up again as with his course.

It was not a good omen to his staying power or his credibility.

It was not if he did well in the tasks but whether he should have been there at all after not being honest.

He could have kept someone out who did not have the character flaws he showed, who worked hard and stuck at it but was prevented from appearing because of his lies.

Mine isn't thank you very much!

Nor mine.

There is a difference between tweaking or emphasising parts of your CV to make it look more positive (that everyone does)...

...and saying you spent two years at University when you didn't.


If people seriously think this is acceptable then we might as well scrap the concept of CVs all together.

Claiming two years at University is not 'tweaking' a CV.

I thought Michael was Jewish?

Surely the only relevant parts are:
1: What ws he doing for those 2 years he said he was at uni
and
2: Did he claim to have the degree he was studying for?

Lee's interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAjqJp82N9c

I think he said that he didn't complete the course but I don't know what he was doing - didn't he say his company sent him on the course so maybe he was working as well

Very good point. Was he doing something unspeakable?

The interviewer who no doubt patted himself on the back for his thorough research, neglected even to attempt the more important question.

Lee, now that you have the entire nation curious, what were you doing?

I think it was his work sent him on the course like a day release so he was working at the same time. Many work places do that, my own son got his NVQ by going to college 2 days a week whilst working.

Watching that interview again, I have just realised that I have done that course, Lee walked out of and it was very hard work.

I did BTEC but Lee did HCIMA which can be a correspondance course although needs assessment by tutors.

Now I am angry, he tried to say he completed that course and I sweated blood to get through it.

I went as a mature student with a family, home and college projects to cope with and I kept working and achieved my qualification.

I feel very miffed.

I thought I read somewhere that it said incomplete on his CV & wasn't he working at the same time

He only lied to cover a gap on his CV.

It's not as though he falsified qualifications - which would be fraud - so it's not that great a deal to be honest.

Exactly. He didn't lie about having more qualifications than he has. He lied about how long he attended uni before leaving with no qualifications. It was a stupid lie because it doesn't add anything to his CV. He lied because he has a big insecurity about his lack of formal education.

It's so funny that people actually care so much about this lol