ICAEW.com works better with JavaScript enabled.

Hearings, orders and decisions

This page gives information about hearings of ICAEW's Disciplinary and Appeal Committees, details of future hearings, reports of the findings and other orders made.

Public hearings

Hearings of tribunals of the Disciplinary Committee and panels of the Appeal Committee are normally open to the public. The details of public hearings will be published here seven days before the hearing. These details include:

  • the defendant or appellant's name;
  • the terms of the formal complaint; and
  • the date, time and place of the hearing.

Members of the press or public who attend a hearing are entitled to hear what is said but they are not entitled to see written material. All written material and information provided by ICAEW or a defendant in connection with disciplinary proceedings is confidential, including any application to proceed in private.

Decisions from hearings

This section lists a summary of all recent disciplinary decisions (with the exception of not proven cases). All these decisions are subject to possible appeals.

Full reports of disciplinary orders and regulatory decisions made in the last 12 months are also available.

Details of future disciplinary and appeals hearings
Name of defendant: Mr Robert Neil Aspinall
Complaint: The complaint is that Mr Robert Neil Aspinall is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a
Date of hearing: 24 October 2018
Time: 10:00
Place: IDRC, 70 Fleet Street, London, EC4Y 1EU
Name of defendant: Mr Mahmoodur Imran
Complaint: The complaint is that Mr Mahmoodur Imran is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a
Date of hearing: 24 October 2018
Time: 10:00
Place: IDRC, 70 Fleet Street, London, EC4Y 1EU
Name of defendant: Mr Benjamin Peter White ACA (024379)
Complaint: The complaint is that Mr Benjamin Peter White ACA is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.b and Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.c.
Date of hearing: 22 October 2018
Time: 10:00
Place: IDRC, 70 Fleet Street, London, EC4Y 1EU
Name of defendant: Miss Deborah Annells BSc ACA (004801)
Complaint: The complaint is that Miss Deborah Annells BSc ACA is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a
Date of hearing: 16 October 2018
Time: 10:00
Place: IDRC, 70 Fleet Street, London, EC4Y 1EU
Name of defendant: Auker Rhodes Professional Services LLP
Complaint: The complaint is Auker Rhodes Professional Services LLP is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 5.1c
Date of hearing: 16 October 2018
Time: 10:00
Place: IDRC, 70 Fleet Street, London, EC4Y 1EU
Summary of decisions

A summary of every decision is made available shortly after each hearing. We will not publish details of cases that are not proven. A full report of decisions are available in the ‘Full reports of disciplinary orders and regulatory decisions’ section.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Auker Rhodes Professional Services LLP of Aire Valley Business Centre, Lawkholme Lane, KEIGHLEY, West Yorkshire, BD21 3HW. United Kingdom

Type of Member: Member Firm

Terms of complaint

  1. From on or after 1 July 2012 to 28 September 2015 Auker Rhodes Professional Services LLP failed to return client money to Mr ‘A’ despite his request for his monies to be repaid to him, contrary to regulation 20A of the Clients’ Money Regulations
  2. Between 15 March 2012 and 31 July 2012 Auker Rhodes Professional Services LLP failed to hold client money in excess of £10,000 in separate designated client money accounts, contrary to Regulation 13 of the Clients’ Money Regulations.
  3. On 31 July 2012 Auker Rhodes Professional Services LLP failed to comply with regulation 20h of the Clients’ Money Regulations as the firm withdrew £88,030 from the general client bank account using funds held for Mr ‘A’ (£27,283), Mr ‘B’ (£31,256) and Mr ‘C’ (£29,491), to pay for invoices due from ‘D’ Ltd and ‘E’ LLP without written authority from Mr ‘A’, Mr ‘B’ or Mr ‘C’ to use those funds.

Auker Rhodes Professional Services LLP is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 5.1c

Hearing date

16-18 October 2018

Finding

Complaint 1 - Proved
Complaint 2 - Proved
Complaint 3 - Proved

Order

Severe reprimand
Costs of £14,930.00
Fine of £5,000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Freddie Sandberg of London, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 3 October 2018

Type of Member: Provisional Member

Terms of complaint

On 19 May 2017 at a Crown Court, Mr Freddie Sandberg was convicted of wounding/inflicting grievous bodily harm.

Mr Freddie Sandberg is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1e.

Bye-law 4.1e states…..That he has, in a court of competent jurisdiction, been convicted of an indictable offence (or has, before such a court, outside England and Wales been convicted of an offence corresponding to one which is indictable in England and Wales.

Finding

The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Sandberg's own admission

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Sandberg be severely reprimanded and pay costs of £3,500.

This decision may be subject to appeal and the appeal deadline is 31 October 2018

 

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Michael Eric Moss FCA of Wilmslow, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 3 October 2018

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

On 1 June 2017 at a Crown Court, Mr Michael Moss was convicted of stalking involving serious alarm/distress.

Mr Michael Eric Moss is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1e.

Bye-law 4.1e states…. that he has, in a court of competent jurisdiction, been convicted of an indictable offence (or has, before such a court, outside England and Wales been convicted of an offence corresponding to one which is indictable in England and Wales’

Finding

The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Moss' own admission

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Moss be severely reprimanded and pay costs of £2,800.75

This decision may be subject to appeal and the appeal deadline is 31 October 2018

 

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Ray Alan Davis ACA of Chichester, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 3 October 2108

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Mr R A Davis ACA failed to provide by 19 March 2018 the information, explanations and documents requested in a letter dated 1 March 2018 issued under Disciplinary Bye-law 13.

Mr Ray Alan Davis is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c.

Bye-law 4.1c states… If he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them.

Finding

The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Davis' own admission

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Davis comply with requests made in the letter of 1 March 2018 by midnight on 17 October 2018 and pay costs of £2,000.

This decision may be subject to appeal and the appeal deadline is 31 October 2018

 

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mrs Mandy Claire Brown of Hertford, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 18 September 2018

Type of Member: Affiliate

Terms of complaint

  1. Between 31 March 2014 and 1 June 2015 Mrs Mandy Brown prepared and filed a self-assessment tax return on behalf of her client for the year 2013-14. In doing so Mrs Mandy Brown failed to:

    a. Verify that the above tax return complied with UK tax legislation.
    and / or
    b. Exercise sound judgement and / or professional scepticism in applying professional knowledge and skill when preparing the above tax return.

Mrs Mandy Claire Brown is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1b

4.1b states……A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time at the time of the occurrence giving rise to the liability: if he has performed his professional work or the duties of his employment, or conducted his practise, inefficiently or incompetently to such an extent, or on such a number of occasions, as to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the professional of accountancy.

Finding

The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mrs Brown's own admission

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mrs Brown be severely reprimanded and pay costs of £9,312.

This decision may be subject to appeal and the appeal deadline is 16 October 2018

 

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Christopher Anthony Bugden of Brighton, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 15 August 2018

Type of Member: Former Member

Terms of complaint

  1. That between 15 October 2008 and 23 February 2009, Mr C Bugden, in his capacity as director of ‘A’ Limited made loans totalling £358,000 to ‘B’ Limited and ‘C’ Limited  in which he was a director when:

    a. the loans were not disclosed appropriately in the financial statements.
    b. there were no safeguards in place to ensure Mr Bugden’s objectivity.

  2. That between 23 January 2008 and 6 September 2011, Mr C Bugden, in his capacity as director of ‘A’ Ltd, improperly paid items of his personal expenditure totalling £67,733 from the company’s bank accounts for his own benefit
  3. Mr C Bugden, in his capacity as director of ‘A’ Limited approved accounts for the three years ended 31 March 2009, 2010 and 31 July 2011 whereby loans to connected companies:

    (a) were incorrectly recorded as a cash balance; and/or weeks, the balance of the Client Bank Account with the total corresponding credit balances held for clients.
    (b) failed to be recorded in compliance with FRSSE 15.1 in that they were not disclosed as related party transactions.     

Mr Christopher Anthony Bugden is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a for complaints 1 and 2 and 4.1.b regarding complaint 3

4.1a: if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

4.1b: if he has performed his professional work or the duties of his employment, or conducted his practice, inefficiently or incompetently to such an extent, or on such a number of occasions, as to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Hearing date

15 August 2018

Finding

Complaint 1.b: Proved

Complaint 2: Not proved

Complaint 3:Proved on own admission

Order

Reprimand

Fine of £3,000.00

Costs of £10,000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Norman Leighton FCA of Indre, France

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 31 July 2018

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Between 1 January 2002 and 31 August 2009 Mr Norman Leighton FCA conspired with others to cheat the public revenue.

Mr Normal Leighton is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a.

4.1a states.. If in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Findings: The Tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Leighton’s own admission

Order: The Tribunal ordered that Mr Leighton be excluded from membership and pay costs of £2,500

This decision may be subject to appeal and the appeal deadline is 28 August 2018

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Keith Hayley FCA of Tunbridge Wells, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 31 July 2018

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Between 1 January 2002 and 31 August 2009 Mr Keith Hayley FCA conspired with others to cheat the public revenue.

Mr Keith Hayley is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a.

4.1a states … If in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Finding: The Tribunal found the complaint proved

Order: The Tribunal ordered that Mr Hayley be excluded from membership and pay costs of £4,000.

This decision may be subject to appeal and the appeal deadline is 28 August 2018

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Reyss Cato (formerly known as Mr Reyss Albert) of London, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 18 July 2018

Type of Member: Provisional Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Mr Reyss Cato (formerly Mr Reyss Albert) dishonestly submitted to ICAEW a falsified transcript of results from Bournemouth University which stated that he had obtained 54% in a Management Accounting module when he knew that the original transcript stated that he had obtained 40% in the Management Accounting module.
  2. In a conversation on 9 December 2016 Mr Reyss Cato (formerly Mr Reyss Albert) dishonestly told his training manager, Mr ‘A’ that he had passed the Accounting exam taken on 8 December 2016 when he knew he had failed the exam.
  3. In an email dated 3 January 2017 Mr Reyss Cato (formerly Mr Reyss Albert) dishonestly told his line manager, Mr ‘B’ that he had passed the Accounting exam taken on 8 December 2016 when he knew that he had failed the exam.

Hearing date: 18 July 2018

Finding:Unfit to become a member

Order: Costs of £3,000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Jason Spenser Bennett FCA of London, United Kingdom

A Tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 10 April 2018 and 17 July 2018

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

1.Mr JS Bennett, FCA on behalf of his firm, ‘A’ Limited prepared and signed a letter dated 10 March 2011 regarding Mrs ‘B’ which contained the following errors:

  • Mrs ‘B’’s salary for the year ending 05 April 2011 from ‘C’ Limited was said to be £5,700.
  • Dividend payments for ‘D’ Limited for the years ending 31 December 2010 and 2011 and ‘C’ Limited for the year ending 31 August 2011, were said to be based on financial statements when the financial statements had not been prepared at the date of the letter.
  • The figures for dividends available for payment from ‘C’ Limited and ‘D’ Limited for each year were calculated without taking into account: (i) Corporation Tax
  • Dividend figures available for payment for ‘C’ Limited did not take account of mortgage arrears payable by Mrs ‘B’
  • The figures for dividends available for payment from ‘D’ Limited for the year ending 31st December 2010 in the sum of £12,500 were calculated without taking into account negative reserves of £14,465 as at 31 December 2009.
  • The figures for dividends available for payment from ‘D’ Limited for the year ending 31 December 2010 in the sum of £12,500 were calculated without taking into account negative reserves of £10,893 as at 31 December 2010.

2. Mr J S Bennett FCA on behalf of his firm, ‘A’ Limited, signed an accountant’s certificate dated 09 January 2012 regarding Ms ‘B’ which was inaccurate in that:

  • The ’D’ entry of £14,465 for 2009 was shown as a profit when it should have shown as a loss of £14,465. 
  • The combined post-tax profit figure for both companies of £13,773 for 2010 had failed to take account of corporation tax amounting to £2,142. 
  • The dividend received in 2010 of £8000 for ‘C’ Limited was stated as being £20,500. 

Mr Jason Spenser Bennett is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1b.

4.1b – if he has performed his professional work or the duties of his employment, or conducted his practice, inefficiently or incompetently top such an extent, or on such a number of occasions, as to bring discredit on himself, ICAEW or the professional of accountancy.

Finding: The tribunal found the complaints proved

Order: The tribunal ordered that Mr Bennett be reprimanded, fined £3,000 and pay costs of £10,000.

This decision may be subject to appeal.  The appeal deadline is 14 August 2018

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Peter Vernon Charles Cass [FCA] of Middlesex, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 3 July 2018.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Complaint 1

A. Between April 2009 and 9 July 2009 Mr Peter Vernon Charles Cass FCA instructed ’A’  to prepare amended financial statements for ‘C’ Ltd for the year ended 30 November 2007 on the basis that an advancement of £50,000 from Mr ‘B’ was a director’s loan, in circumstances where he knew the monies had not been received from a director of the company and he deliberately intended that the position should be misrepresented in this way.

Complaint 2

A.Mr Peter Vernon Charles Cass FCA, in relation to claim 'X', Mr 'B' v Mr 'D' and 'C' Ltd, stated in his second witness statement, dated 24 November 2014, at paragraph 7 that ‘the amendment to the stock is evident from even the most cursory inspection of the original and amended 2007 accounts where the balance sheet changes only at the stock and retained profits lines’ but deliberately or recklessly omitted to state that other amendments had been made, and / or failed fully to explain such amendments, specifically:

  1. the reclassification of the advancement of £50,000 from Mr ‘B’ from being a ‘loan long term’ to being a director’s loan; and 
  2. the addition of  a going concern note which stated ‘Included in creditors is an amount due to the director of £91,208 (£29,513). The director has undertaken to support the company for a period of twelve months from the date of signing these financial statements and furthermore that he will not seek repayment of the monies due to him until either all third party creditors have been settled or until sufficient investment has been obtained to ensure the continuing viability of the company.

Mr Peter Vernon Charles Cass is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a in respect of complaints 1A  and 2.

4.1(a) – If in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Finding

The tribunal found the complaints proved on Mr Cass’ own admission

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Cass be excluded from membership and pay costs of £16,000

This decision could be subject to appeal.  The appeal period expires on 31 July 2018

Disciplinary committee summary of decision

Mr Owen Francis Finn of Brough, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 27 June 2018

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Complaint 1

On 10 April 2017 at Kingston- Upon- Hull Crown Court, Mr Owen Finn ACA FCA, was convicted of causing serious injury by dangerous driving on 7 October 2016.

Complaint 2

On 7 October 2016, Mr Owen Finn ACA FCA, was the driver of a vehicle that failed to stop after a road accident.

Complaint 3

On 7 October 2016, Mr Owen Finn ACA FCA, was the driver of a vehicle involved in a road accident and failed to report that accident.

Complaint 4

On 7 October 2016, Mr Owen Finn ACA FCA, drove a motor vehicle with an alcohol level above the legal limit.

Hearing date: 27 June 2018

Finding

All complaints proved.

Order

Excluded Costs of £2,500.00

Disciplinary committee summary of decision

Mr Terence Sefton Potter of MONACO, and also of the UNITED KINGDOM

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 27 June 2018

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Complaint

1. On dates between 1 January 2007 and 8 February 2012, Mr Terence Potter ACA, with intent to defraud HMRC, conspired with others to cheat the public revenue, as described in the indictment.

Mr Terence Sefton Potter is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a

Hearing date: 27 June 2018

Finding

Complaint found proved

Order

Excluded

Costs of £3374.00

Disciplinary committee summary of decision

Mr William Beach of London, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 24 April, 11 and 12 June 2018

Type of Member: Provisional Member

Terms of complaint

  • 1A - Between 23 November 2014 and 6 December 2014 Mr William Beach improperly took 10 days paid study leave when he knew he should have taken paid or unpaid holiday.
  • 2A - Mr William Beach failed to comply with the fundamental principle of integrity in that he failed to inform his employer that he was working from home and available for work to be allocated to him on the following days:
    • from and including 23 March 2015 to 27 March 2015 (5 days)
    • from and including 30 March 2015 to 2 April 2015 (4 days)
    • from and including 7 April 2015 to 10 April 2015 (4 days)
    • from and including 26 May 2015 to 29 May 2015 (4 days)
    • from and including 1 June 2015 to June 2015 (5 days)
    • 8 June 2015 and 10 June 2015 (2 days)

Mr William Beach is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1a in respect of head 1A and 2A

Finding

The tribunal found complaints 1A and 2A proved

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Beach be reprimanded and pay costs of £4,200.

This decision is subject to possible appeal. The appeal deadline is 10 July 2018

Disciplinary committee summary of decision

Mr Prasath Sabanathan of South Croydon, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 29 May 2018

Type of Member: Provisional Member

Terms of complaint

  1. During a meeting on 7 September 2016, Mr Prasath Sabanathan told ‘A’ that he had visited his doctor between 6 and 12 July 2016, regarding gastritis. This was dishonest in that Mr Sabanathan knew he had not visited his doctor during this period regarding gastritis.
  2. On or around 9 September 2016, Mr Prasath Sabanathan was dishonest in that he falsified a medical certificate dated 8 September 2016 from Dr ‘B’ and submitted this to ‘A’.

Mr Prasath Sabanathan is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a

Decision of the disciplinary committee

Finding

Severe reprimand

Cost

No order

Fine

£3840.00

Appeal Committee Panel Summary of Decision

Mr Christopher William Dix FCA of Wakefield, West Yorkshire

A panel of the Appeal Committee made the decision recorded below having heard an appeal on 22 and 23 May 2018 of hearing.

Type of Member: Member

Date of Disciplinary Tribunal Hearing

18, 19 and 20 April 2017

Date of Appeal Panel Hearing

22 and 23 May 2018

Terms of complaint found proven before the Disciplinary Tribunal

1. Mr C W Dix FCA failed to comply with section 110.1 of the Code of Ethics that he be straightforward and honest in his professional and business relationships as he failed to disclose to Mr ‘A’, a co-owner of ‘B’ Limited, payment arrangements he had made with a client namely ‘C’ Ltd and ‘D’ Ltd.

2. Between 14 July 2009 and 24 June 2014 Mr C W Dix FCA allowed the sum of £8000 due to ‘B’ Ltd to be paid into a personal bank account and thereafter to be improperly retained by him.

3A. Mr CW Dix FCA issued an audit report on accounts of ‘G’ Limited for the year ended 31 May 2012, signed on or around 25 February 2013 in the name of ‘E’ Limited when he knew his firm was not a Registered Auditor, contrary to Section 1213 of the Companies Act 2006.

4A. Mr CW Dix FCA issued an audit report on accounts of ‘F’ Limited for the year ended 31 December 2012, signed on 30 April 2013 in the name of ‘H’, when he knew his firm was not a Registered Auditor, contrary to Section 1213 Companies Act 2006. 

5. Mr CW Dix FCA permitted abbreviated accounts to be filed when the client was not entitled to file them because an audit report had been attached on the following occasions: 

a. Accounts for the year ended 31 May 2012 for ‘G’ Limited signed on or around 25 February 2013.

b. Accounts for the year ended 31 December 2012 for ‘F’ Limited signed on 30 April 2013.

Disciplinary Tribunal’s Sentencing Order

(i) Severe reprimand

(ii) Fine of £50,000

(iii) Costs of £16,720

(iv) Fine and costs to be paid within 30 days of service of the Record of Decision

Appeal against finding? Yes against complaint 1: otherwise no

Appeal against Sentencing order? Yes

Appeal against Costs Yes

Decision of Appeal Panel

Appeal against finding: dismissed. Appeal against sentencing order: allowed in part

Fine reduced to £25,000

Fine and costs to be paid within one year of 22 May 2018

Disciplinary committee summary of decision 

This decision is subject to possible appeal. The appeal deadline is 13 June 2018 Disciplinary committee summary of decision 

Mr John Thomas George Harris ACA of Northampton,

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 15 May 2018

Type of Member:  Member

Terms of complaint

1. Mr John Harris, ACA, between 25 July 2011 and 05 September 2014, did not ensure that the appeal sent to Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service on 01 July 2011, on behalf of Mr ‘A’ for the VAT quarters ended July 2002-April 2006, had been successfully submitted when he ought to have known that it had not been.

2. Between 27 February 2013 and 05 September 2014 Mr Harris maintained to HMRC and Mr ‘A’ that the appeal sent to Her Majesty’s Court’s and Tribunal Service on 01 July 2011, for the VAT quarters ended July 2002-April 2006, had been successfully submitted when he ought to have known that it had not been.

3.Mr John Thomas George Harris is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1b for complaints 1 and 2.

4.1b - If he has performed his professional work or the duties of his employment, or conducted his practice inefficiently or incompetently to such an extent, or on such a number of occasions, as to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Finding

The tribunal found complaints 1 and 2 proved on Mr Harris’ own admission

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Harris be reprimanded, fined £1,300 and pay costs of £5,000

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision 

Mr Grant James Farrell of Gardeners Cottage, Court Lane, Dorney, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 6QP

A panel of the Appeal Committee made the decision recorded below having heard an appeal on 24 April 2018

Type of Member: Member

Date of Disciplinary Tribunal Hearing

19 December 2017

Date of Appeal Panel Hearing

24 April 2018

Terms of complaint found proven before the Disciplinary Tribunal

1. Between 31 March 2010 and 31 March 2012, Mr Grant Farrell ACA dishonestly and intending thereby to make a gain for himself or another, made false representations which were and which he knew were or might be untrue or misleading, in that he used the debit card and bank account of Windsor Swimming Club for his own personal use and / or expenditure. As a consequence of this behaviour he was convicted of three counts of fraud contrary to section 1 Fraud Act 2006.

2. Between 31 March 2007 and 31 March 2012, Mr Grant Farrell ACA stole cash belonging to Slough Junior Athletics Club. As a consequence of this behaviour he was convicted of one count of theft contrary to section 1(1) Theft Act 1968.

Mr Grant James Farrell is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a.

4.1 ‘A member or provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student (all hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent’) shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

a. if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Disciplinary Bye-law 7.1 (pre October 2016) states:

7.1 ‘The fact that a member, member firm or provisional member has, before a court of competent jurisdiction, pleaded guilty to or been found guilty of an indictable offence (or has, before such a court outside England and Wales, pleaded guilty to or found guilty of an offence corresponding to one which is indictable in England and Wales) shall for the purposes of these bye-laws be conclusive evidence of the commission by him of such an act or default as is mentioned in bye-law 4.1.a. or 5.1.a. as the case may be.’

Decision of the Appeal Committee

Appeal refused

Costs

No order

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Ronald David Enticott of Potential House, 19 Abbey Road, Chertsey, Surrey, KT16 8AL

A panel of the Appeal Committee made the decision recorded below having heard an appeal on 26 April 2018.

Type of Member: Member

Date of Disciplinary Tribunal Hearing

5 July 2017

Date of Appeal Panel Hearing   

26 April 2018

Terms of complaint found proven before the Disciplinary Tribunal

Mr Ronald Enticott FCA failed to comply with regulation 21 of the Clients’ Money Regulations because, on 23 occasions, he caused or permitted funds to be withdrawn from his firm’s client account which were greater than the credit balances held for those clients. Full particulars are set out in a letter sent to Mr Enticott dated 5 February 2016 (Appendix 1)

1. Mr Ronald Enticott FCA failed to comply with regulation 10 of the Clients’ Money Regulations as on the following two occasions he paid funds from clients into the firm’s office bank account:

  • £397.40 on 16 January 2012
  • £102.83 on 24 October 2012

3. Mr Ronald Enticott FCA failed to comply with regulation 11 of the Clients’ Money Regulations as he paid funds on the following two occasions into the client bank account which were personal funds of the firm and not Clients’ Money:

  • £3,000 on 29 January 2013
  • £10,000 on 7 January 2014

Mr Ronald David Enticott is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c. Disciplinary Bye-Law 4.1c states the following:

4.1. A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

c. If he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them.

Decision of the Appeal Committee

Appeal refused

Costs

£450.00, in addition to the Disciplinary Committee costs order

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Alan Charles Read of Ashford Read, Basepoint Enterprise Centre, Andersons Road, Southampton, SO14 5FE

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 28 March 2018

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

The Defendant failed to provide by 20 September 2017 the information, explanations and documents requested in a letter dated 5 September 2017 issued under Disciplinary Bye-law 13.

Finding: Proven

Order:

  1. Severe Reprimand
  2. Fine £4,000
  3. Costs £2860
  4. Order that the Defendant provides the information requested in the letter to him of 5 September 2017 by 17:00 on Wednesday 18 April 2018.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Bharatkumar Ranchhodbhai Patel of X UNITED KINGDOM

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 28 March 2018.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

On 18 November 2015 Mr Bharatkumar Ranchhodbhai Patel, FCA, caused grievous bodily harm with intent to commit grievous bodily harm to X, by hitting her on the head with a bottle and stabbing her.

Finding: Proven on own admission

Order: Exclusion, and for him to pay costs of £500.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Marcus William Black of
Monks Close, Nidd Lane, Birstwith, Harrogate, HG3 3AL.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 28 March 2018.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Between 29 August 2016 and 16 June 2017 Mr Marcus Black ACA failed to submit his CPD records for the year ended 31 October 2015 in breach of Principal Bye-law 56c.

Finding: Proven on own admission

Order: No order by way of Sanction, but to pay costs of £1500.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Alfred Roy Lote of
Exchequer House, 117 Lea Street, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, DY10 1SN.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 27 February 2018.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Between 2 January 2008 and 19 June 2015, the Defendant failed to comply with regulation 10 of the Client Money Regulations in that he allowed his firm to receive clients’ money totalling £211,547.72 into the firm’s office account and which were not immediately paid into a Client Bank Account.
  2. Between 1 July 2013 and 27 May 2014, the Defendant failed to comply with regulation 9b of the Clients’ Money Regulations as he did not notify the bank in writing of the terms of the account and did not obtain the bank’s acknowledgement in writing.
  3. Between 1 July 2013 and 27 May 2014, the Defendant failed to comply with regulation 31 of the Clients’ Money Regulations as he failed to have in place arrangements with another qualified firm or person to enable the proper distribution or processing of Clients’ Money held by the firm in the event of his death or incapacity.
  4. Between 1 July 2013 and 27 May 2014 the Defendant failed to comply with regulation 24 of the Clients’ Money Regulations as he failed to maintain adequate records of the transactions in his firm’s Client Bank Account.
  5. Between 1 July 2013 and 27 May 2014, the Defendant failed to comply with regulation 25 of the Clients’ Money Regulations in that the firm failed to reconcile, at least once every five weeks, the balance of the Client Bank Account with the total corresponding credit balances held for clients.
  6. Between 15 November 2013 and 27 May 2014 the Defendant failed to comply with regulation 20i of the Clients’ Money Regulations as he withdrew £28,167.64 from his firm’s Client Bank Account without written authority from the client.
  7. On 24 March 2014, the Defendant issued an Accountant’s Report on the financial statements for John R Fox Ltd for the year ended 28 February 2014 and failed to correct the following errors identified by QAD’s review of the financial statements for the year ended 28 February 2013 carried out at their Desk Top review on 23 July 2013:

    a. Dividends paid have been incorrectly shown as an expense in arriving at profit before tax in the profit and loss account
    b. The profit and loss account does not show the profit for the financial year.
    c. Note reference numbers on the balance sheet and profit and loss account do not correspond with the notes.
    d. The accounts do not disclose an analysis by director or details of movements for an overdrawn directors loan account shown in debtors.

  8. Following a QAD Desk Top Review on 23 July 2013, the Defendant stated the following on behalf of his firm: 
    ‘I propose to include a paragraph from 1/11/2013 in the standard letter I send with my clients accounts stating their rights of complaint and on the invoices I send I will state the basis of calculating my fees’. However, when an external compliance review was carried out on 29 April 2014, it was found that he had not complied with those assurances.

    If proven, the member may be liable to disciplinary action under:

    a) Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c in respect of heads 1 to 6
    b) Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1b in respect of head 7
    c) Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a in respect of head 8

Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1 states:

4.1 ‘A member, provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student (all hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent’) shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member, provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student at the time of the occurrence giving rise to the liability:

a. in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

b. if he has performed his professional work or the duties of his employment, or conducted his practice, inefficiently or incompetently to such an extent, or on such a number of occasions, as tobring discredit on himself,  the Institute or the profession of accountancy;

c. if he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, give or imposed under them;’

 

Finding:  The tribunal found all heads of complaint proved on Mr Lote’s own admission.

Order:  The tribunal ordered that Mr Lote be severely reprimanded, fined £250 and pay costs of £2,750.

 

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr James Arthur Guest FCA of 91 Princess Street, MANCHESTER, M1 4HT

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 27 February 2018.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

  1. The Defendant, on behalf of his firm, J A Guest Ltd, failed to respond to the QAD Audit Closing Record of a meeting dated 23 September 2015 by 14 October 2015 or to subsequent written or oral reminders dated 26 November 2015, 15 December 2015 and 7 January 2016. 

    The Defendant is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1b in respect of both heads of complaint.

Finding:  The tribunal found the complaint proved.

Order:  The tribunal ordered that Mr Guest be severely reprimanded, fined £5,750 and pay costs of £3,000.

 

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Miss Deepa Haria of 101 Evelyn Drive, Pinner, Middlesex , HA5 4RN

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 30 January 2018

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

On multiple occasions between 1 January 2014 and 25 February 2015, Miss Deepa Haria ACA requested the tax records of a number of individuals from a HMRC employee and thereby encouraged and / or assisted in the wrongful disclosure of customs information, an offence contrary to section 19(1) and (4) of the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005. As a result of this behaviour Miss Deepa Haria was convicted of an offence contrary to Section 44 Serious Crime Act 2007.

Finding: The tribunal found the complaint proved.

Order: The tribunal ordered that Miss Haria be excluded and pay costs of £4000.00.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Barry Craig Barlow FCA of Butterworth Barlow Limited, Prescot House, 3 High Street, Prescot, Merseyside, L34 3LD

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 23 January 2018

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

1A Mr Barry Barlow FCA, director of Butterworth Barlow Ltd, allowed the following sums to be transferred from the firm’s client bank account when he knew or was reckless as to whether this was contrary to Regulation 21 Clients’ Money Regulations:

  • a. £5,000 on 23 September 2014
  • b. £5,000 on 7 November 2014
  • c. £5,000 on 25 November 2014
  • d. £3,000 on 24 February 2015
  • e. £7,041.40 on 5 March 2015

Mr Barry Craig Barlow is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1.a in respect of head 1A

Finding: The tribunal found the complaint proved.

Order: The tribunal ordered that Mr Barlow be severely reprimanded, fined £2,000 & pay costs of £2,835.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Gavin Butterworth FCA of Butterworth Barlow, Prescot House, 3 High Street, Prescot, Merseyside, L34 3LD

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 23 January 2018

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

1A Mr Gavin Butterworth FCA, director of Butterworth Barlow Ltd, transferred the following sums from the firm’s client bank account when he knew or was reckless as to whether this was contrary to Regulation 21 Clients’ Money Regulations:

  • a. £5,000 on 23 September 2014
  • b. £5,000 on 7 November 2014
  • c. £5,000 on 25 November 2014
  • d. £3,000 on 24 February 2015
  • e. £7,041.40 on 5 March 2015

Mr Gavin Butterworth is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1.a in respect of head 1A.

Finding: The tribunal found the complaint proved.

Order: The tribunal ordered that Mr Butterworth be severely reprimanded, fined £2,000 & pay costs of £2,835.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Butterworth Barlow of
Prescot House, 3 High Street, Prescot, Merseyside, L34 3LD.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 23 January 2018

Type of Member Firm

Terms of complaint

  1. Between 7 November 2014 and 5 March 2015 Butterworth Barlow Ltd failed to comply with regulation 21 of the Clients’ Money Regulations as the firm failed to ensure that the credit balances held for all clients was at least equal to the total balance held in all client bank accounts by making the following unauthorised withdrawals:
    • £5,000 on 23 September 2014
    • £5,000 on 7 November 2014
    • £5,000 on 25 November 2014
    • £3,000 on 24 February 2015
  2. Butterworth Barlow Ltd failed to comply with regulation 13 of the Clients’ Money Regulations because the firm did not pay the sum of £17,151.70 received from ‘A’ Limited on 29 September 2014 into a designated client account within 30 days of receipt of the monies from the client.
  3. Between 27 November 2011 and 15 June 2015 Butterworth Barlow Limited failed to comply with regulation 9b of the Clients’ Money Regulations as the firm did not obtain from the bank in writing confirmation of the trust status of the firm’s client bank account.
  4. Between November 2011 and November 2015 Butterworth Barlow Limited failed to comply with regulation 25 of the Clients’ Money Regulations as the firm did not, at least once every five weeks, reconcile the total balances on all its Client Bank Accounts with the total corresponding credit balances in respect of its clients.

Butterworth Barlow is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 5.1.c

DBL5.1.c states:

A member-firm or contracted firm (both hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent firm’) shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases:
c. if it has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them;

Finding: The tribunal found the Complaints proved on firm’s own admission

Order:The tribunal ordered that the firm be severely reprimanded, fined £3,000 & pay costs of £3,896

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr David Richard Meacher-Jones of 6 St. Johns Court, Vicars Lane, Chester, CH1 1QE.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 9 and 10 January 2018.

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

  1. On 26 February 2014, Mr D Meacher-Jones FCA issued an audit report in the trading name of his firm, Meacher-Jones, in respect of the financial statements of ‘A’ Limited for the year ended 30 September 2013 when the firm was not a registered auditor, contrary to section 1213 of the Companies Act 2006.
  2. On 4 July 2014, Mr D Meacher-Jones FCA issued an audit report in the trading name of his firm, Meacher-Jones, in respect of the financial statements of ‘B’ Limited for the year ended 30 April 2014 when the firm was not a registered auditor, contrary to section 1213 of the Companies Act 2006.
  3. On 12 May 2014, Mr Meacher-Jones FCA issued an accountants report in the trading name of his firm, Meacher-Jones, in respect of the unaudited financial statements of ‘C’ Ltd for the year ended 30 September 2013 when the company was not entitled to audit exemption under section 477 of the Companies Act 2006.

Finding Proved (heads ii and iii on own admission)

Order SEVERE REPRIMAND

Fine of £5000.00

Costs to the ICAEW £3000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Grant James Farrell of Gardeners Cottage, Court Lane, Dorney, WINDSOR, BERKSHIRE, SL4 6QP.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 19 December 2017

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Between 31 March 2010 and 31 March 2012, Mr Grant Farrell ACA dishonestly and intending thereby to make a gain for himself or another, made false representations which were and which he knew were or might be untrue or misleading in that he used the debit card and bank account of ‘X’ Swimming Club for his own personal use and /or expenditure. As a consequence of this behaviour he was convicted of three counts of fraud contrary to section 1 Fraud Act 2006
  2. Between 31 March 2007 and 31 March 2012, Mr Grant Farrell ACA stole cash belonging to ‘Y’ Junior Athletics Club.  As a consequence of this behaviour he was convicted of one count of theft contrary to section 1(1) Theft Act 1968.

Mr Grant James Farrell is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a.

4.1. ‘A member or provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student (all hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent’) shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

a. if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Disciplinary Bye-law 7.1 (pre October 2016) states:

7.1. ‘The fact that a member, member firm or provisional member has, before a court of competent jurisdiction, pleaded guilty to or been found guilty of an indictable offence (or has, before such a court outside England and Wales, pleaded guilty to or found guilty of an offence corresponding to one which is indictable in England and Wales) shall for the purposes of these bye-laws be conclusive evidence of the commission by him of such an act or default as is mentioned in bye-law 4.1.a. or 5.1.a. as the case may be.’

Finding

Proven on own admission

Order

Mr Grant James Farrell was excluded from membership and ordered to pay costs of £3,600

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Paul Charles Singleton FCA of Riverdale, 89 Graham Road, SHEFFIELD, S10 3GP.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 12 & 13 December 2017

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

Mr Paul Singleton FCA failed to act in a professional manner, in breach of s150.1 of the Code of Ethics, as a result of him using offensive language toward Mrs ‘X and Mr ‘Y’ on the evening of 27 June 2015 outside a pub in Sheffield.

Mr Paul Charles Singleton is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL)

4.1.a. ‘A member, provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student (all hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent’) shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member, provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

…..if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Finding

The tribunal found the complaint proved

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Singleton be reprimanded, fined £1,500 and pay costs of £8,000.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Anthony Charles David Wiggin FCA  of 1 Soane Point, 6-8 Market Place, READING, RG1 2EG. UNITED KINGDOM

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 6 December 2017.

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Mr A C D Wiggin FCA, while a director of ‘A’ Ltd, demonstrated by his behaviour that he was unfit to be a director of a company. Full particulars of the matters alleged to have rendered him unfit are set in the form of undertaking given by Mr Wiggin under the Company Directors Disqualification Act (CDDA) 1986 signed by Mr Wiggin on 8 December 1999.
  2. Mr A C D Wiggin FCA, between 8 December 1999 and 6 May 2015 failed to report to ICAEW Head of Staff that he had been disqualified as a director pursuant to Section 6 Company Directors Disqualification Act and / or failed to disclose the undisputed facts supporting that disqualification. 

Mr Anthony Charles David Wiggin is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1a in respect of head one and 4.1.c in respect of head two.

Finding

The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Wiggin’s own admission.

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Wiggin be reprimanded, fined £2,500 and pay costs of 5,000.  The fine and costs to be paid by way of 12 monthly instalments.

Appeal committee panel of tribunal summary of decision

Mr Shafeen Ramjan Akbar of 5 The Court Yard, Holding Street, Rainham, Gilligham, Kent, ME8 7HE. 

A panel of the Appeal Committee made the decision recorded below having heard an appeal on 5 December 2017.

Type of member   Member
Date of Disciplinary Tribunal Hearing  24 May 2017 
Date of Appeal Panel Hearing      5 December 2017

Terms of complaint found proven before the Disciplinary Tribunal

1.Mr S R Akbar FCA, following a QAD visit on 7 August 2007 confirmed on behalf of his firm that: 

a.“The practice would be stopped” in relation to a QAD point regarding clients’ money being banked in the office account.

but as a subsequent QAD visit on 1 December 2014 it was found that the assurance had not been complied with.

2.Mr S R Akbar FCA failed to comply with regulation 10 of the Clients’ Money Regulations as he paid client funds into the firm’s office bank account. 

3.Mr S R Akbar FCA inaccurately completed the 2010 to 2014 inclusive annual returns for his firm, S. Akbar & Co, as he stated that the firm did not handle client money when he knew that it did 

4.Mr S R Akbar FCA between 10 September 2015 and 31 December 2015 failed to cooperate with the Practice Assurance Committee in breach of Regulation 4 of the Practice Assurance Regulations in that he failed as requested on the 10 September 2015 to obtain an external review of S Akbar & Co’s compliance with the Practice Assurance Regulations. 

Mr Shafeen Ramjan Akbar is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1.a in respect of heads 1 and 3 and DBL 4.1.c in respect of heads 2 and 4.

DBL4.1: A member… shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member…at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

a. if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy;

c.if he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them;

Sentencing Order

i) Reprimand 
(ii) Fine of £2,000 
(iii) Contribution to costs of £2,500

The sum of £4,500 is payable in 12 equal monthly instalments of £375 to be paid on the 1st day of each month commencing on 1 July 2017.
 
Appeal against finding?  No
Appeal against Sentencing order?  Yes
Appeal against Costs  Yes
Decision of Appeal Panel Appeal dismissed
Appeal costs of £1,500 

Appeal committee panel of tribunal summary of decision

Mr Simon John Austin of Pine House, Chandlers Way, Southend-on-Sea, Essex, SS2 5SE. 

A panel of the Appeal Committee made the decision recorded below having heard an appeal on 5 December 2017.

Type of Member  Member 
Date of Disciplinary Tribunal Hearing 7 March 2017 
Date of Appeal Panel Hearing     5 December 2017

Terms of complaint found proven before the Disciplinary Tribunal

1. Mr Simon Austin FCA failed to obtain and submit to ICAEW the results of external hot file reviews within one month of their completion in breach of a condition imposed by the Audit Registration Committee, set out in a letter dated 14 October 2010, in respect of the following eight audit reports issued by his firm, Austins:

a)‘A’ Ltd - audit report signed on 13 September 2012 
b)‘B’ Ltd – audit report signed on 14 June 2012
c)‘C’ plc – audit report signed on 27 June 2012
d)‘D’ Ltd – audit report signed on 8 October 2012
e)‘E’ Ltd – audit report signed on 5 March 2012
f)‘F’ Ltd – audit report signed on 31 August 2012
g)‘G’ Ltd – audit report signed on 22 June 2012
h)‘H’ Ltd – audit report signed on 14 May 2012

2. Mr Simon Austin FCA inaccurately completed the 2012 ICAEW annual return for his firm, Austins, in that he failed to disclose the following five new audit clients:

a)‘A’ Ltd
b)‘B’ Ltd
c)‘E’ Ltd
d)‘F’ Ltd
e)‘G’ Ltd

3.Mr Simon Austin FCA inaccurately completed the 2013 ICAEW annual return for his firm, Austins, in that he failed to disclose the following three new audit clients:

a)‘C’ plc
b)‘D’ Ltd
c)‘H’ Ltd and the following five existing audit clients:
d)‘A’ Ltd
e)‘B’ Ltd
f)‘E’ Ltd
g)‘F’ Ltd
h)‘G’ Ltd

4. Mr Simon Austin FCA failed to obtain the Audit Registration Committee’s approval prior to accepting the following new audit appointments in breach of a restriction imposed by the Audit Registration Committee, set out in a letter dated 14 October 2010:

a)‘A’ Ltd
b)‘B’ Ltd
c)‘C’ plc
d)‘D’ Ltd
e)‘E’ Ltd
f)‘F’ Ltd
g)‘G’ Ltd
h)>‘H’ Ltd

5.Mr Simon Austin FCA issued audit reports in the name of his firm, Austins, when the audit was not conducted in accordance with International Standard on Auditing (UK & Ireland) 210 ‘Agreeing the terms of audit engagements’ as the appointment as auditor should not have been accepted when the auditor was aware, before accepting the audit engagement, that those who appoint the auditor would impose a limitation on the scope of the audit work likely to result in the need to issue a disclaimer of opinion on the financial statements:

Year ended 31 December 2011 – audit report dated 4 December 2013
Year ended 31 December 2012 – audit report dated 28 July 2014

6.Mr Simon Austin FCA issued audit reports in the name of his firm, Austins, when the audit was not conducted in accordance with International Standard on Auditing (UK & Ireland) 210 ‘Agreeing the terms of audit engagements’ as the appointment as auditor should not have been accepted when the auditor was aware, before accepting the audit engagement, that those who appoint the auditor would impose a limitation on the scope of the audit work likely to result in the need to issue a disclaimer of opinion on the financial statements:

Year ended 31 August 2012 – audit report dated 27 August 2013
Year ended 31 August 2013 – audit report dated 26 February 2014

7.From 9 May 2012 to 28 July 2014, Mr Simon Austin FCA failed to comply with Regulation 7 of The Money Laundering Regulations 2007 in that he failed to identify the beneficial owner of ‘D’ Ltd and to take adequate measures, on a risk sensitive basis, to verify their identity.

8.From 8 February 2012 to 26 February 2014, Mr Simon Austin FCA failed to comply with Regulation 7 of The Money Laundering Regulations 2007 in that he failed to identify the beneficial owner of ‘G’ Ltd and to take adequate measures, on a risk sensitive basis, to verify their identity.
Mr Simon John Austin is therefore liable to disciplinary action:

i.In respect of heads 1, 2, 3 and 4 under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a;
ii.In respect of heads 5, 6, 7 and 8 under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.b.

Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1 states:

4.1 ‘A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

a if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy;
b if he has performed his professional work or the duties of his employment, or conducted his practice, inefficiently or incompetently to such an extent, or on such a number of occasions, as to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.’

Sentencing Order of Disciplinary Committee Tribunal

(i)Exclusion from membership, with a recommendation that no application for readmission be entertained until Mr Austin is able to demonstrate full insight into and contrition for his behaviour.

(ii)Costs of £7,500 be paid by 12 equal instalments of £625 each starting on the 1st of May 2017.
Appeal against finding? No
Appeal against Sentencing order? Yes
Appeal against Costs Yes
Decision of Appeal Panel  Appeal panel varied how the costs are to be paid

Exclusion and costs of £7,500 stands and in addition costs of the appeal of £1,250 to be paid

Costs to be paid by way of 25 equal instalments of £350 per month
 

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr David Sherrington of 16 Gold Tops, NEWPORT, GWENT, NP20 4PH. UNITED KINGDOM

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 28 November 2017

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

  1. On 12 November 2013, Mr D Sherrington FCA prepared a letter to a client and dated the letter 25 July 2013, which he knew was dishonest. or in the alternative:
  2. On 12 November 2013, Mr D Sherrington FCA failed to act in accordance with the fundamental principles (Code of Ethics), specifically integrity, in that he prepared a letter to a client and dated the letter 25 July 2013, when he should have known that to do so was incorrect.

Mr Sherrington is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1(a)

Finding

  1. Not proved
  2. Proved on own admission

Order

Reprimand Fine of £1000.00

Costs to the ICAEW of £5000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Nigel Peter Courtney Newman ACA of 1 Emperor Way, Exeter, EX1 3QS. 

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 22 November 2017

Type of Member:Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Between 5 April 2013 and 6 April 2014, Mr Nigel Newman ACA submitted false self- assessment returns to HMRC for a number of individuals purporting to be from ‘A’ Ltd claiming repayments of tax of £28,343.09.
  2. Between 26 July 2013 and 31 March 2015 Mr Nigel Newman ACA submitted false VAT returns to HMRC for the following companies:
  • ‘A’ Ltd – repayment claim of £22,580
  • ‘B’ Ltd– repayment claim of £21,004
  • ‘C’ Ltd – repayment claim of £11,269

If proven, the member may be liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1(a).

4.1a states…If in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Finding

The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Newman’s own admission

Order

Mr Newman was excluded from membership and ordered to pay costs of £4,274

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Andrew William Thompson of Kenilworth Associates Limited, 2 Kenilworth Road, Blundellsands Liverpool, L23 3AD. United Kingdom

A panel of the Appeal Committee made the decision recorded below having heard an appeal on 16 November 2017 of hearing

Type of Member: Member

Date of Disciplinary Tribunal Hearing: 18 April 2017

Date of Appeal Panel Hearing: 16 November 2017

Terms of complaint

Found proven before the Disciplinary Tribunal

Prior to June 2005, Mr A Thompson ACA, as office holder in five insolvency cases, drew excessive remuneration which subsequently resulted in successful claims against Insolvency Practitioner ‘F’ as particularised in the following cases:

No   Case  Claim 
1 Mr ‘A’  £28,384
2 Mr ‘B’
£21,335
3 Mr ‘C’ 
£16,015
4 Mr ‘D’
£14,981
5 ‘E’ Limited
 £11,095

Decision of the Appeal Committee

Appeal Dismissed

Exclusion 

DC Costs in the sum of £25,000 

AC Costs in the sum of £1,250.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Christopher John Wright ACA of 236 Ashby Road, Hinckley, Leicestershire, LE10 1SW

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 14 November 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Mr Christopher Wright ACA, while director of ‘A’ Ltd, demonstrated by his behaviour that he was unfit to be a director of a company. Full particulars of the matters alleged to have rendered him unfit are set out in the ‘matters of unfitness’ in the schedule to the undertaking given by Mr Wright under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 and signed by him on 20 November 2015.

Mr Christopher John Wright is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1(a)

4.1(a) If in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Hearing date

14 November 2017

Finding

Proved by own admission

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Wright be excluded and pay costs of £8,400

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Robert Leslie Feld FCA of 9 Beaumont Place, Barnet, Hertfordshire, EN5 4PR

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 18 October 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

1. On or around 06 June 2007, Mr R L Feld FCA failed to declare the following cash deposits on the Inheritance Tax forms for the estate of his late father:

  • £265,842 held in the Israel Discount Bank, Tel Aviv.
  • £38,075 (approx.) held in UBS, Zurich.

2. Between 2007 and 2015 Mr R L Feld FCA failed to declare income arising from the above offshore accounts on his self-assessment tax returns.

Mr Robert Leslie Feld is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1(a)

4.1(a) If in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Finding

The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Feld’s own admission

Order

The tribunal ordered that Mr Feld be severely reprimanded, fined £12,000 and pay costs of £7,123.50

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Jeremy Albert Cope FCA of Bottle End Cottage, Bleachfield Lane, Beoley, Redditch, Worcestershire, B98 9AX. 

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 17 October 2017

Type of MemberMember

Terms of complaint

1. Mr Jeremy Cope FCA incorrectly prepared the accounts of ‘A’ Limited for the year ended 31 March 2014 as: 

a. He understated sales revenue by £20,070; 
b.He understated trade debtors by £ £1,194; 
c.He did not correctly account for overdrawn directors’ accounts of £22,900; 
d.He understated the VAT creditor balance by £4,014.

2.Mr Jeremy Cope FCA acted as the principle in respect of his firm, ’B’ Limited’s preparation of the statutory accounts of ‘A’ Limited for the year ended 31 March 2014, when circumstances existed where it was probably that a reasonable and informed third party would conclude his objectivity either was impaired or was likely to be impaired, causing him to be in breach of ICAEW Code of Ethics.  

Mr Jeremy Albert Cope is therefore liable to disciplinary action:

a.In respect of head one, under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.b.
b.In respect of head two, under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a.

A member, provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student (all hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent’) shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member, provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability

4.1.b  if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, ICAEW or the profession of accountancy;

4.1.a  if he has performed his professional work or the duties of his employment, or conducted his practice, inefficiently or incompetently to such an extent, or on such a number of occasions, as to bring discredit on himself, ICAEW or the profession of accountancy;

Finding:The tribunal found head of complaint 1 not proved and head of complaint 2 proved.

Order: The tribunal ordered that Mr Cope be reprimanded, fined £2,000 & pay costs of £4,500

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mrs Marine Qasam of 6 Meades Lane, Chesham, Buckinghamshire, HP5 1ND. United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 11 October 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

In or around March 2015, Mrs Marine Qasam ACA breached paragraph 101.1 of the Code of Ethics (Integrity) in that she altered a stock audit schedule for the audit of the financial statements of ‘A’ Ltd for the year ended 31 December 2014 such that it no longer reflected the audit work undertaken.

The defendant is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a

Finding

Complaint found proved on own admission

Order

Severe reprimand Fine of £2,000.00 Costs to the ICAEW of £2,000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Gerald Sidney Hyam of 17 Grosvenor Square, LONDON, W1K 6LB, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 4 October 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Between 18 January 2012 and 15 February 2012 Mr Gerald Hyam FCA submitted a false Value Added Tax (VAT) return claiming repayment of £85,669 to HMRC for Curtain Road Ltd.

Mr Gerald Sidney Hyam is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1(a)[1].

Finding

Complaint proved.

Order

Exclusion from membership Costs to the ICAEW of £3,500.00 with a recommendation that no application for re-admission be considered for a minimum of five years.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Geoffrey Richard Long of 65a High Street, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 3AQ. UNITED KINGDOM

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 12 September 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

1A - Mr Geoffrey Long FCA acted as a nominee ATS Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd who received a commission payment in respect of an introduction between Mr & Mrs ‘E’ and ‘YZ LLP’. The commission was not disclosed to Mr & Mrs ’E’ nor was consent obtained, contrary to 240.7b of the Code of Ethics.

Or in the alternative

1B - Mr Geoffrey Long failed to deal fairly with Mr & Mrs ‘E’ contrary to section 110 of the Code of Ethics in that he arranged for ATS Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd to receive a commission for the introduction of Mr & Mrs ’E’ but he failed to disclose to Mr & Mrs ‘E’ that he had a relationship with ATS Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd as his family controlled it and ATS Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd was on his company’s PII. 

If proven, the member may be liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a for both heads of complaint.

Finding 

Head 1A proved by admission.

Head 1B not considered in light of the admission to Head 1A

Terms of complaint

1A - Mr Geoffrey Long FCA acted as a nominee for A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd who received a commission payment in respect of an introduction between Dr ‘D’ and ’VW’ and Dr ‘D’ and ‘YZ LLP’. This commission was not disclosed to Dr ‘D’ nor was advanced consent to retain the commission obtained contrary to section 240.7b of the Code of Ethics 

Or in the alternative

1B - Mr Geoffrey Long failed to deal fairly with Dr ‘D’ contrary to Section 110 of the Code of Ethics in that he arranged for A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd to receive a commission payment for the introduction of the client but he failed to disclose to Dr ‘D’ that he had a relationship with A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd as his family controlled it and A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd was on his company’s PII.

If proven, the member may be liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a in respect of head 1A or 1B.   

Finding

Head 1A proved by admission.

Head 1B not considered in light of the admission to Head 1A.

Terms of complaint

1A - Mr Geoffrey Long FCA acted as a nominee for A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd who received a commission payment in respect of an introduction between Dr ‘B’ and/or Dr 'C’ and ‘YZ LLP’. This commission was not disclosed to Dr ‘B’ and/or Dr ‘C’ nor was advanced consent to retain the commission obtained contrary to section 240.7b of the Code of Ethics.

Or in the alternative

1B - Mr Geoffrey Long FCA failed to deal fairly with Dr ‘B’ and/or Dr ‘C’ contrary to Section 110 of the Code of Ethics in that he arranged for A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd to receive a commission payment for the introduction of the client but he failed to disclose to Dr ‘B and/or Dr ‘C’ that he had a relationship with A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd as his family controlled it and ‘A’ Ltd was on his company’s PII.

Further complaints

2.   Mr Geoffrey Long FCA failed to properly prepare the partnership tax return of ‘D’ for the years ended 5 April 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011.

3.   Mr Geoffrey Long FCA exercised a lien over the books and records of Dr ‘B’, Dr ‘C’ and ‘D’ when we was not entitled to do so in breach of section 240.4f of the Code of Ethics.

Finding

Complaint proved.

Head 1A proved by admission.

Head 1B not considered in light of the admission to Head 1A.

Heads 2 and 3 not proved.

Terms of complaint

1A - Mr Geoffrey Long FCA acted as a nominee for A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd who received a commission payment in respect of an introduction between Dr ‘A’ and ‘YZ LLP’. This commission was not disclosed to Dr ‘A’ nor was advanced consent to retain the commission obtained contrary to section 240.7b of the Code of Ethics.

Or in the alternative

1B - Mr Geoffrey Long FCA failed to deal fairly with Dr ‘A’ contrary to Section 110 of the Code of Ethics in that he arranged for A.T.S. Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd to receive a commission payment for the introduction of the client but he failed to disclose to Dr ‘A’ that he had a relationship with A.T.S. Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd as his family controlled it and A.T.S. Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd was on his company’s PII.

Further Complaints

2.   Mr Geoffrey Long FCA allowed the submission of dormant accounts to Companies House in relation to Long & Company Ltd (Company Number 02547773) for the years ended 31 October 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 when Long & Company Ltd were not entitled to submit them because the company was trading.

3.   Mr Geoffrey Long FCA allowed the submission of dormant accounts to Companies House in relation to Long & Co (Dentax) Limited (Company Number 08703810) for the year ended 30 September 2014 when he was not entitled to submit them because the company was trading.

4.   Mr Geoffrey Long FCA held himself out as a director of Long & Company Ltd in Long & Company Ltd correspondence when he was not a director.

5.   Following a change in trading entity from Long & Company Ltd to Long & Co (Dentax) Ltd Mr Geoffrey Long FCA failed to notify Dr ‘A’ of the complaints procedure and the basis of charging fees as required by Disciplinary Bye-law 11 and section 240 of the Code of Ethics.

Finding

Complaint proved.

Heads 1A and 5 proved by admission.

Heads 2, 4 and 4 proved.

Head 1B not considered in light of the admission to Head 1A.

Terms of complaint

1A - Mr Geoffrey Long FCA acted as a nominee for A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd   who received a commission payment in respect of an introduction between Mr ‘F’ and ‘YZ LLP’. This commission was not disclosed to Mr ‘F’ nor was advanced consent to retain the commission obtained contrary to section 240.7b of the Code of Ethics

Or in the alternative

1B - Mr Geoffrey Long FCA failed to deal fairly with Mr ‘F’ contrary to Section 110 of the Code of Ethics in that he arranged for A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd  to receive commission payment for the introduction of the client but he failed to disclose to Mr ’F’ that he has a relationship with A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd  as his family controlled it and A.T.S Accountancy & Taxation Services Ltd was on his company’s PII.

Finding

Complaint proved.

Head 1A proved by admission.

Head 1B not considered in light of the admission to Head 1A.

Order: Exclusion from membership. Fine of £8,000.00. Costs to the ICAEW of £47,000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr G M Hunt BA FCA of Twin Oaks, 36 Moreland Drive, Gerrads Cross, Buckinghamshire, SL9 8BD.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 8 August 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Mr G M Hunt FCA failed to provide by 10 September 2016 the information, explanations and documents requested in a letter dated 24 August 2016 issued under Disciplinary Bye-law 13.

Mr Graham Mark Hunt is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1.c.

Finding: Proven

Order: Severe reprimand. Pay fine of £5000.00, pay costs of £3337.00 and provide the outstanding DBL 13 information within 28 days of the order.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Brian Keates FCA FIFP CFP of 53 Short Lane , Barton under Needwood, Burton- on- Trent, Staffordshire, DE13 8LB.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 8 August 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Mr Brian Keates FCA failed to provide by the 23 December 2016 the information, explanations and documents requested in a letter dated 6 December 2016, issued under Disciplinary Bye-law 13.

Mr Brian Edward Keates is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.c.

Finding: Proven in part

Order: Severe reprimand. Pay fine of £5000.00 and costs of £3500.00.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Bruce Edward Pritchett of Kingsley House, Church Lane, Shurdington CHELTENHAM, GL51 5TQ. UNITED KINGDOM

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 25 July 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

1. Between 1 May 2006 and 31 July 2013 Mr B E Pritchett ACA committed the following offences:

  • One count of obtaining property by deception to make gain for self/another or cause loss to other/expose to risk;
  • 20 counts of dishonestly making false representation;
  • Two counts of fraud by abuse of position;
  • One count of proceeds of crime – money laundering; and
  • One count of false accounting.

2. Mr B E Pritchett ACA breached a restraint order dated 15 August 2012 and thereby committed the offence of perverting the course of justice on three occasions by:

  • disposal of land;
  • divesting himself of directorship; and
  • removing himself from involvement with a company.

Mr Bruce Edward Pritchett is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1(a)

Finding: Head of complaint 1 found proven in part. Head of complaint 2 found proven in part

Order: EXCLUDED, pay costs of £4,649.50

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr John Michell of 91 Newington Green Road, Canonbury, LONDON, N1 4QX. UNITED KINGDOM

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 25 July 2017

Type of Member: Provisional Member

Terms of complaint

On 9 January 2014 Mr John Michell caused the death of Mr ‘G’ by driving dangerously as he was using or attempting to use his mobile phone to read ‘Whatsapp’ messages.Mr John Michell is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 1.4(a).

Finding: Complaint found proved

Order: No order, pay costs of £3,900.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Richard Peter Braysher FCA of 2 High Road, Eastcote, Pinner, Middlesex, HA5 2EW.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 19 July 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Mr Richard Braysher FCA failed to comply with an Order made by a tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee on 19 April 2016 to produce the information requested in a DBL13 letter dated 30 October 2015 within 28 days of the Order coming into effect.

Mr Richard Peter Braysher FCA is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c.

Finding: Proven on own admission

Order:Severe reprimand, pay costs of £3,500.00 and fine of £5,000.00.

Mr Braysher was ordered to produce the information requested in the Disciplinary Bye-law letter of 30 October 2015 within 28 days of this order coming into effect.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Richard Peter Braysher FCA of 2 High Road, Eastcote, Pinner, Middlesex, HA5 2EW.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 19 July 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Mr Braysher FCA incorrectly prepared the accounts and corporation tax return of ‘A’ Limited for the year ended 31 August 2014 as:

    a. He included a director’s salary of £7,800 when the salary received by the director and notified to HMRC through RTI was £6,700;
    b. He included all motor expenses relating to a vehicle which was not a company car;
    c. He included a VAT creditor of £5,351 when the amount due to HMRC in respect of VAT was £4,049.46;
    d. He understated income relating to that year by £16,350;
    e. He did not correctly account for an overdrawn directors’ loan account of £10,000.
  2. Mr Braysher FCA incorrectly prepared the self-assessment tax return of 'B’ for the tax year ended 5 April 2014 as it showed a salary of £7,600 when the salary received by the director, as notified to HMRC through RTI, was £7,200.

Finding: Proven

Order: Severe reprimand, pay costs of £6,000.00 and fine of £6,600.00.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr David M Graham ACA of St Ann’s Quay, 118 Quayside, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 3BD.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 18 July 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Mr David Graham ACA failed to put in place adequate safeguards to prevent a conflict of interest in that ‘X’ Limited, of which he was at the material time the sole director, made loans from funds belonging to Trust A and Trust B to ‘Y’ Limited, a company of which he was a director.

Mr David Michael Graham is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a.

4.1 states… A member, provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student … shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member, provisional member, foundation qualification holder or foundation qualification student at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability.

a. if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Finding: The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Graham’s own admission.

Order: The tribunal ordered that Mr Graham be reprimanded, fined £2,000 pay costs of £6,612.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Omar Sharif of PO Box 3043, Abbots House, Abbey Street Reading, RG1 3BD. United Kingdom.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 12 July 2017.

Type of Member: Provisional Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Mr O Sharif breached the fundamental principle of integrity when he signed training contracts with ‘A’ and ‘B’ on the 10 and 11 September 2015 when he was in a training contract with ‘C’.
  2. Mr O Sharif breached the fundamental principle of integrity when he commenced five days of training with ‘C’ on the 14 September 2015 having signed training contracts with ‘A’ and ‘B’ on the 10 and 11 September 2015.
  3. Mr O Sharif breached the fundamental principle of integrity when he attended a ‘B’ training course on the 27 October 2015 after he had tendered his resignation to ‘B’.
  4. Between 2 October 2015 and 5 April 2016 Mr O Sharif improperly retained:
    a. A laptop, mobile phone, bag and accessories belonging to a firm (‘B’)
    b. A loan of £1,916.81 from a firm (‘B’)
  5. Mr O Sharif received a payment from ‘B’ on the 29 November 2015 when he knew he was not entitled to all or part of the payment and failed to return it until the 6 April 2016.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 12 July 2017.

Finding: Proven (all four heads)

Order: Severe reprimand, cease to be a provisional member, and be ineligible for re-registration for a period of 2 years, and pay a fine of £4000.00.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Lovelace Prempeh FCA of PO Box AN 5401, Accra. Ghana.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 21 June 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Between 31 January 2013 and 8 February 2016 Mr L Prempeh FCA failed to certify compliance with Continuing Professional Development requirements for the period 1 November 2011 to 31 October 2012 in breach of Principal Bye-law 56c.
  2. Between 31 January 2014 and 8 February 2016 Mr L Prempeh FCA failed to certify compliance with Continuing Professional Development requirements for the period 1 November 2012 to 31 October 2013 in breach of Principal Bye-law 56c.
  3. Between 31 January 2015 and 8 February 2016 Mr L Prempeh FCA failed to certify compliance with Continuing Professional Development requirements for the period 1 November 2013 to 31 October 2014 in breach of Principal Bye-law 56c.

Mr Lovelace Prempeh is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1(c). In that If he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them

Between 31 January 2016 and 8 February 2016 Mr L Prempeh FCA failed to certify compliance with Continuing Professional Development requirements for the period 1 November 2014 to 31 October 2015 in breach of Principal Bye-law 56c.

Finding: The complaint was found proved

Order: The tribunal ordered that Mr Prempeh be reprimanded, fined £3,400 and pay costs of £3,300.

The tribunal also ordered that by 16:00 on 31 October 2017 Mr Prempeh is to produce to ICAEW certificates of compliance with the Continuing Professional Development requirements for the following periods

  • 1 November 2011 to 31 October 2012
  • 1 November 2012 to 31 October 2013
  • 1 November 2013 to 31 October 2014
  • 1 November 2014 to 31 October 2015

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Roy Crosby FCA of 20 Norgetts Lane, Melbourn, Royston, SG8 6HS.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 21 June 2017

Type of Member Member

Terms of complaint

  1. Between 23 July 2012 and 24 February 2015 Mr Roy Crosby FCA failed to notify all clients, in writing, of the basis on which fees will be rendered as required by paragraph 240.2b of The Code of Ethics.

  2. Between 23 July 2012 and 24 February 2015 Mr Roy Crosby FCA failed to ensure that all new clients were informed in writing of the name of the principal to be contacted if they wished to make a complaint and the client’s right to complain to ICAEW contrary to Disciplinary Bye-law 11.1.

  3. Between 17 June 2015 and 1 September 2015, Mr Roy Crosby FCA failed to provide a response to a letter dated 26 May 2015 from a Practice Assurance case manager as required by Regulation 15 of the Practice Assurance Regulations.

Disciplinary Bye-Law 4.1(a) states: In the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Disciplinary Bye-Law 4.1 (c) states: If he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them.

Finding:The complaint was found proved

Order:The tribunal ordered that Mr Crosby be severely reprimanded, fined £4,000 and pay costs of £5,000.

The tribunal also ordered that Mr Crosby’s practising certificate is immediately withdrawn until such time as he has remedied the matters of which the complaint has been made, to the satisfaction of the Practice Assurance Committee.

Unless Mr Crosby has undertaken such remedial steps to the satisfaction of the Practice Assurance Committee by 30 September 2017 his practising certificate shall be deemed withdrawn indefinitely.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Darren Eric Ashley of ACA of 17 Caldbeck, Waltham Abbey, EN9 1UR

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 21 June 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Mr Darren Ashley ACA failed to provide by 27 October 2016 the information, explanations and documents requested in a letter dated 11 October 2016 issued under Disciplinary Bye-law 13.

Mr Darren Eric Ashley is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1(c)

…. In that he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them.

Finding: The complaint was found proved


Order:The tribunal ordered that Mr Ashley be severely reprimanded, fined £4,000 and pay costs of £2,500.

The tribunal also ordered that Mr Ashley provide to ICAEW by 16:00 on 20 July 2017 the information, explanations and documents requested in its letter dated 11 October 2016.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Jonathan Marcus Marshall ACA of JM Associates (UK) Ltd, 21a Craven Terrace, LONDON, W2 3QH.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 13 June 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

In an email dated 9 December 2013 Mr Jonathan Marshall FCA improperly advised one partner in a partnership to act contrary to the interests of the other, when he had previously assured both partners that he was an impartial adviser to the partnership, contrary to Section 220 of the Code of Ethics (Conflict of Interest).

Mr Jonathan Marshall is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a.

Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a states:

4.1 A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

a. if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.

Finding:The tribunal found the complaint proved on Mr Marshall’s own admission

Order: The tribunal ordered that Mr Marshall be severely reprimanded, fined £4,000 and pay costs of £16,000.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Sunil Bance of 11 Bulmer Gardens, Harrow, Middlesex , HA3 0PA

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 7 June 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Between in or around September 2007 and November 2010, originally as accountant to Wey Bridging Ltd (WBL) and subsequently as an executive director of WBL, Mr S Bance dishonestly misrepresented to investors that WBL was a successful business and run in a proper corporate way when he knew the majority of the transactions which underpinned WBL’s operations were bogus as demonstrated by:

a. WBL obtained a lending facility of £1,500,000 from Natwest Bank on 11 January 2008. Its purpose was to provide loans of a short term nature to enable WBL to make similar short term loans to its borrowers. Between February 2008 and February 2009 WBL draw down notes were provided to Natwest Bank which falsely stated that monies were used to make loans to borrowers when, in fact, there were no such borrowers.

b. WBL fabricated property valuations to facilitate the fraudulent draw down claims from Natwest Bank.

c.Numerous cross firing payments were made between WBL, the directors of WBL and companies owned by the directors of WBL which were intended to give the impression that it was an active loan business.

d. WBL’s loan book was fabricated and monthly management accounts were false.

e. The directors of WBL used investors’ money for their personal benefit.

f. The directors provided misleading material to the company’s auditors in relation to the audit of the accounts for the year ended December 2009.

g. The threat of winding up proceedings against WBL was concealed from investors.

Mr Sunil Bance is therefore liable to disciplinary action pursuant to Disciplinary Bye-Law 4.1.a.

Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a states:

4.1 ‘A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

a. if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.’

Or in the alternative:

Between in or around September 2007 and November 2010, originally as accountant to Wey Bridging Ltd (WBL) and subsequently as an executive director of WBL, Mr S Bance misrepresented to investors that WBL was a successful business and run in a proper corporate way when he should have known that the majority of transactions which underpinned WBL’s operations were bogus as demonstrated by:

a. WBL obtained a lending facility of £1,500,000 from Natwest Bank on 11 January 2008. Its purpose was to provide loans of a short term nature to enable WBL to make similar short term loans to its borrowers. Between February 2008 and February 2009 WBL draw down notes were provided to Natwest Bank which falsely stated that monies were used to make loans to borrowers when, in fact, there were no such borrowers.

b. WBL fabricated property valuations to facilitate the fraudulent draw down claims from Natwest Bank.

c. Numerous cross firing payments were made between WBL, the directors of WBL and companies owned by the directors of WBL which were intended to give the impression that it was an active loan business.

d. WBL’s loan book was fabricated and monthly management accounts were false.

e. The directors of WBL used investors’ money for their personal benefit.

f. The directors provided misleading material to the company’s auditors in relation to the audit of the accounts for the year ended December 2009.

g. The threat of winding up proceedings was concealed from investors.

Mr Sunil Bance is therefore liable to disciplinary action pursuant to Disciplinary Bye-Law 4.1.b.

Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1b states:

4.1 ‘A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

b if he has performed his professional work or the duties of his employment, or conducted his practice, inefficiently or incompetently to such an extent, or on such a number of occasions, as to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy. Finding: Proven on own admission

Order: No order, pay costs of £3,000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Samuel Nunn of 4 Lytham Road, Kirkby-in-Ashfield, Nottingham, NG17 8NQ

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 6 June 2017.

Type of Member: Provisional Member

Terms of complaint

  1. On three occasions in June 2015 Mr Samuel Nunn had in his possession indecent photographs of children.
  2. On two occasions in June 2015 Mr Samuel Nunn distributed indecent photographs of children.

Mr Samuel Nunn is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1a.

Finding: Proven on own admission

Order: Cease to be a provisional member and be ineligible for re-registration as a provisional member for a period of two years.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Paul Anthony Megson FCA of 6 Freeman Road, High Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE7 7AH

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 6 June 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Mr P A Megson FCA failed to provide information, explanations and documents within 14 days of service of a letter dated 7 September 2016 requesting him to provide the same pursuant to Disciplinary Bye-law 13.

Mr Paul Anthony Megson is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.c[1].

Finding: Proven

Order: Sever reprimand, pay costs of £1,500.00 and fine of £4,000.00.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision against a member recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 16 May 2017.

Terms of complaint

Between 1 February 2013 and 7 November 2013, a member engaged in public practice without holding a practising certificate, contrary to Principal Bye-law 51a.

The member is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.c.

Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.c states the following:

4.1. A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability,

c. if he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them.

Finding: Complaint proved in part that between 1 February 2013 and 23 April 2013 the member engaged in public practice without holding a practising certificate, contrary to Principal Bye-law 51a.

Order: The tribunal made no order but directed that the member pay costs of £1,500.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr J Belford [FCA] of 18 Low Road Close, Cockermouth, Cumbria, CA13 0GU

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 10 May 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Between 27 November 2012 and 10 September 2013 Mr Belford submitted false information to the HMRC Appeal Tribunal.

Mr Belford is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a.

Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a states:

4.1 ‘A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

a if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.’

Finding: Complaint found on own admission

Order: Excluded and pay costs of £2,000.00.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Thomas Richard James Williams FCA of Bramley Cottage, Town Row Green, Rotherfield, Crowborough, TN6 3QU

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 12 April 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Complaint

  1. Between 1 January 2012 and 24 August 2016 Mr Thomas Williams FCA engaged in public practice without holding a practicing certificate, contrary to Principle Bye-law 51a
  2. Between 1 January 2012 and 24 August 2016 Mr Thomas Williams FCA engaged in public practice without professional indemnity insurance as required by Regulation 3.1 of the Professional Indemnity Insurance Regulations

Mr Thomas Richard James Williams is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.c in that he has committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them

Finding: Complaint found proven

Order: Excluded, and pay costs of £2651.50

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Andrew William Thompson ACA of Kenilworth Associates Limited, 2 Kenilworth Road, Blundellsands LIVERPOOL, L23 3AD.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 18 April 2017

Type of Member: Member

Terms of complaint

Prior to June 2005, Mr A Thompson ACA, as office holder in five insolvency cases, drew excessive remuneration which subsequently resulted in successful claims against Insolvency Practitioner Licence Bonds as particularised in the following cases:

No Case Claim
1 Mr ‘A’ £28,384
2 Mr ‘C’ £21,335
3 Mr ‘B’ £16,015
4 Mr ‘D’ £14,981
5 ‘E’ Limited £11,095

Mr Andrew William Thompson is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a.

Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.a states …in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy;

Finding: The complaint was found proved

Order: Mr Thompson was excluded from membership of ICAEW and ordered to pay costs of £25,000

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Christopher William Dix of Unit 3, Silkwood Court, Wakefield, West Yorkshire, WF5 9TP, United Kingdom.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 18, 19 and 20 April 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Complaint

1. Mr C W Dix FCA failed to comply with section 110.1 of the Code of Ethics that he be straightforward and honest in his professional and business relationships as he failed to disclose to Mr ’A’, a co-owner of ‘B’ Limited, payment arrangements he had made with a client namely ‘C’ Ltd and ‘D’ Ltd.

2. Between 14 July 2009 and 24 June 2014 Mr C W Dix FCA allowed the sum of £8000 due to ‘B’ Ltd to be paid into a personal bank account and thereafter to be improperly retained by him.

3A. Mr CW Dix FCA issued an audit report on accounts of ‘E’ Limited for the year ended 31 May 2012, signed on or around 25 February 2013 in the name of C W Dix Limited when he knew his firm was not a Registered Auditor, contrary to Section 1213 of the Companies Act 2006.

Or, in the alternative

3B. CW Dix FCA issued an audit report on accounts of ‘E’ Limited for the year ended 31 May 2012, signed on or around 25 February 2013 in the name of CW Dix Limited, when he should have known his firm was not a Registered Auditor, contrary to Section 1213 Companies Act 2006.

4A. Mr CW Dix FCA issued an audit report on accounts of ‘F’ Limited for the year ended 31 December 2012, signed on 30 April 2013 in the name of Chris Dix Accountants, when he knew his firm was not a Registered Auditor, contrary to Section 1213 Companies Act 2006.

Or, in the alternative

4B. Mr CW Dix FCA issued an audit report on accounts of ‘F’ Limited for the year ended 31 December 2012, signed on 30 April 2013 in the name of Chris Dix Accountants, when he should have known his firm was not a Registered Auditor, contrary to Section 1213 Companies Act 2006.

5. Mr CW Dix FCA permitted abbreviated accounts to be filed when the client was not entitled to file them because an audit report had been attached on the following occasions:

  • a. Accounts for the year ended 31 May 2012 for ‘E’ Limited signed on or around 25 February 2013.
  • b. Accounts for the year ended 31 December 2012 for ‘F’ Limited signed on 30 April 2013.

Finding: 1. Proven, 2. Proven, 3. Proven, 4. Proven, 5. Proven on own admission

Order: Severe Reprimand, costs £16,720.00 and fine £50,000.00

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Andrew Richard Nicholson FCA of Shieling, The Orchard, Staverton, Daventry, Northamptonshire, NN11 6JA.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 12 April 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Complaint

Mr A Nicholson FCA failed to provide by 11 March 2016 the information, explanations and documents requested in a letter dated 24 February 2016 issued under Disciplinary Bye-law 13.

Mr Andrew Nicholson is therefore liable to disciplinary action as follows:

Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1.c.

…committed a breach of the bye-laws or of any regulations or has failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them.

Finding: Complaint found proven

Order: Severe reprimand, fined £6000.00 and pay costs of £3184.67.

Disciplinary committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Doyran Allen David Pawlyn FCA of Charlcote, Steels Lane, Oxshott, Leatherhead, KT22 0RF.

A tribunal of the Disciplinary Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal complaint on 12 April 2017.

Type of Member: Member

Complaint

Between 1 May 2011 and 12 September 2013 Mr D A D Pawlyn FCA stole just under £40,000 from ‘A’ Ltd, his employer.

Mr Doyran Allen David Pawlyn is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law (DBL) 4.1.a[1].

[1}‘A member or provisional member shall be liable to disciplinary action under these bye-laws in any of the following cases, whether or not he was a member or provisional member at the time of the occurrence giving rise to that liability:

a. if in the course of carrying out professional work or otherwise he has committed any act or default likely to bring discredit on himself, the Institute or the profession of accountancy.’

Finding: Complaint found proven

Order: Excluded, and pay costs of £2651.50.

Full reports of disciplinary orders and regulatory decisions

This section lists all disciplinary and regulatory decisions published in the last 12 months. If you have any questions about decisions that are not listed here, please call +44 (0)1908 546 293.

Disciplinary decisions made under ICAEW’s bye-laws have to be published. The one exception is a caution.

Once a report has been removed from this page, details of cases may still be available on other websites or in search results.

2018

2017

2016

Private hearings

Applying beforehand for a hearing to be held in private

If you think your hearing should be held in private, you must apply to the chairman in writing and give your reasons. You must send your application to:

The Senior Committee Administrator
Professional Conduct Department
ICAEW
Metropolitan House
321 Avebury Boulevard
Milton Keynes
MK9 2FZ UK.

We must receive your application within 14 days of when you received details of the hearing date. If you can't apply within 14 days, the chairman can consider giving you a further 14 days. You must be able to satisfy the chairman in writing that you could not reasonably have made the application within the original 14 days.

If the chairman refuses your application, they give you their reasons in writing.

ICAEW is entitled to give the chairman its views on your application for the hearing to be held in private within seven days of receiving it. We copy your application to any other party.

If you don't apply beforehand, or if the chairman refuses your application, you can still make an application on the day of the hearing. You should bear in mind, however, that details of your case will already be in the public domain (on this page); members of the public may be there; and your application may be refused. Your application to the tribunal will be in private.

The tribunal chairman will give the reason(s) for any decision to grant or refuse a private hearing.

Applying on the day for a hearing to be held in private

At the hearing, you may still ask the tribunal whether it is prepared to proceed in private. This would usually be on the first day of a hearing, but the tribunal can exercise the power to sit in private at any stage, even if none of the parties have asked it to do so; for example, if it's necessary to protect the identity of a third party. However, we can never guarantee anonymity.

When a tribunal agrees to hold all or part of the hearing in private, it gives its reasons on the day, and in public. The tribunal also gives these reasons in writing if the complaint is found proved.

The tribunal has the power to proceed in private by excluding the press or public from the whole or any part of a hearing, whether or not the parties ask it to do so. It can do this at any stage of a hearing or during a pre-trial review. When it decides whether to exclude anyone, the tribunal considers whether:

  • the interests of justice
  • any other special reason or
  • the particular circumstances of the case

outweigh the public interest in holding a public hearing. The tribunal must also be satisfied that both parties have been given an opportunity to make representations.