Since the last update, the outcomes of three disciplinary tribunals have been published as well as seven consent orders made by the Investigation Committee and two fixed penalties.
In the first disciplinary tribunal, a member was excluded from membership and required to pay costs because he had, while a member of Firm ‘A’, approved and received a personal payment to himself in the sum of £170,000 from Mr ‘B’ / Firm ‘C’, who was a client of Firm ‘A’, for allowing Mr ‘B’ to use the client account of Firm ‘A’ to make payments directed by Mr ‘B’.
This conduct was contrary to section 150.1 of the Code of Ethics (effective 1 January 2011).
In the second disciplinary tribunal published this month, a member was severely reprimanded and required to pay costs as a result of being convicted at Cardiff Crown Court of assault on an emergency worker, contrary to section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and section 1 of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018.
In the third tribunal, a member failed, on two separate occasions, to provide the information, explanations and documents requested by letter, issued in accordance with Disciplinary Bye-law 13.1, contrary to Disciplinary Bye-law 13.2. As a result, they received a severe reprimand, fine of £5,000, and a remedial order to provide the requested information, explanations, and documents within 28 days.
Consent orders made by the Investigation Committee and published this month were that:
One member was subject to two separate consent orders.
In the first they were severely reprimanded and fined £5,000 because they were appointed as a director and company secretary of a limited company client, having been the senior statutory auditor for the financial statements of that client, and had signed the audit opinion on the clients financial statements, in breach of paragraph 2.43 (a) and (c) of the FRC Revised Ethical Standard 2019.
In the second order they were reprimanded and fined £1,000 because they had issued an unqualified audit report on a limited company’s financial statements which stated that the audit had been conducted in accordance with the International Standards on Auditing (‘ISAs’) (UK), when it failed to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to support the going concern conclusion reached, in breach of ISA 570 ‘Going Concern.’
Two members were both reprimanded for the following compliance failures:
- engaging in public practice without holding a practising certificate contrary to Principal Bye-law 51a.
- engaging in public practice through their firm, “X” Limited, without professional indemnity insurance contrary to Regulation 3.1 of the Professional Indemnity Insurance Regulations (effective from 29 May 2020 and / or 1 January 2021).
- engaging in public practice through their firm, “X” Limited, without the minimum level of professional indemnity insurance as required by Regulation 3.2 and / or 3.3 of the Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) Regulations (effective from 29 May 2020 and / or 1 January 2021).
- failure to notify the members’ registrar of ICAEW of the formation of “X” Limited within 28 days as required by the Information to be supplied by members Regulation 3 (effective from 1 December 2010)
- as a principal of “X” Limited, failed to ensure that their firm was supervised by an appropriate anti-money laundering supervisory authority contrary to Regulation 8, and parts 1-6 and 8-11 of the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (effective from 26 June 2017).
One was fined £1,820 and the other was fined £2,100.
Another member was reprimanded and fined £630 because they failed to ensure that their firm was supervised by an appropriate anti-money laundering supervisory authority contrary to a. Parts 1 - 6 of The Money Laundering Regulations 2007 (effective 15 December 2007 until 25 June 2017); and / or b. Regulation 8, and Parts 1 - 6 and 8 - 11 of The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (effective from 26 June 2017).
In a further case of compliance failures another member was reprimanded and fined £2,000 for failing to notify the members’ registrar of ICAEW of the formation of multiple entities, and for failing to ensure their firm was supervised by an appropriate anti-money laundering supervisory authority.
Finally in this edition a member was reprimanded and fined £7,000 because they failed to provide handover information in relation to two clients contrary to paragraph R320.7 of ICAEW’s Code of Ethics.
All of the above consent orders included a requirement to pay costs.
No fixed penalty notices have been published since the last update.
Further details can be found on our Disciplinary Database or please visit our Public Hearings page.