Anne.Onymous
Blogger
Share this content
0
181
17640

Desecration of Chartered status

Desecration of Chartered status

I have group of friends from University who've gone into a variety of "professions" such as chartered accountant, solicitors, doctors, IT consultants, engineers and vets.

Talking to a solicitor friend recently I asked "knowing then what you know now would you still go into law". The answer was emphatically no! Because the rewards do not match the risks and efforts required.

A friend who is an IT consultant (albeit a very good one) earns £1,500 a day does not pay membership fees, does not pay PII, has no governing body, did not have to study professional qualifications, does not need to do CPD.

As a Chartered Accountant the reward is simply not commensurate to the responsibilities and the associated risks. The term Chartered has been diluted to mean any old cra*. At Christmas I returned to the village where I grew to visit family. I bumped into the mother of an old friend, when I asked what her daughter was doing she said she was a Chartered Accountant. Who did she train with? I asked. South Hampton Council was the answer. Really, I wasn't aware you can train with a council?On no she's a CIPFA. Says it all.

Despite only ICAEW and ICAS being entitled to use the Chartered designation it seems everybody uses the term now. The problem is not limited to dubious accountancy bodies fraudulently using the Chartered term but the general over use of the term Chartered.  The Chartered institute of marketing? the Chartered institute of environemental health? What next the chartered institute of toilet cleaners? Add to this the fact "accountant" in the UK is an unprotected term makes an absolute nonsense of the profession.

The profession (and I use the term very loosely) is not in a good place and needs a major overhaul to protect itself and to move forward into a global era.

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
30th Dec 2012 17:18

youre wrong but i agree

thats why i gave up being an FCA after 30 years

Chartered Certified Acciuntanst do exist you know , they shouldnt of course ;-) so its not ONLY

Thanks (0)
avatar
30th Dec 2012 20:00

fundamental issues

I qualified FCA in 1991 but practice as non-Chartered because in my view the ICAEW has no interest in anyone other than fat cat partners and FDs.

Thanks (4)
avatar
30th Dec 2012 20:22

mr mischief

bit you still have to go thro all those ridiculous hoops

Thanks (0)
avatar
30th Dec 2012 20:32

I can't believe I'm even asking this.... but if someone gives up their membership with the institute and practices as an "accountant" for several years outside the ICAEW umbrella can you then reinstate your ICAEW membership at a later date? I assume the answer is no.

There has got to be something fundamentally wrong, here you have three ACA/ FCA each having taken the time, cost and energy to have qualified, yet we all question the benefit of membership.

I have to agree with Mr Mischief all the support seems to be for the big 4 and little in the way of support for the smaller practices.

Thanks (0)
By chatman
04th Jan 2013 11:53

Reinstating ICAEW Membership

Anne.Onymous wrote:
if someone gives up their membership with the institute and practices as an "accountant" for several years outside the ICAEW umbrella can you then reinstate your ICAEW membership at a later date?

I was thrown out of the ICAEW for non-payment of fees during a period abroad, and I had to pay the fees for the year when I was not a member, and possibly a fine, in order to rejoin. I cannot remember whether there were any other requirements. Funnily enough I went for a new job, which had arisen because they had discovered that the previous guy was not a member as he had claimed, so they looked me up in the book to check. Luckily they they accepted my suggestion to look in the previous year's book, where they found me. That is the only time I feel the qualification has been of any use to me.

I agree with a previous poster that the qualification is only useful when looking for a job; in practice it is meaningless these days.

Being particularly immature, I was very disappointed with the new acronym when the Chartered Association of Chartered Accountants changed their name to the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants.

Thanks (0)
avatar
30th Dec 2012 21:15

ACCA are the same

The ACCA qualification is also pretty much worthless these days for small practices.  There is absolutely zero support/help from the association for small practitioners.  My only dealings have been negative since I started my own practice.  I suffered from a compliance review by someone who was clearly nothing but a box ticker and hadn't the faintest idea/interest of the actual accountancy work.  Prior to that, they gave me the go ahead with my choice of company name, only to change their mind a few months later after I'd spent on marketing, websites, business cards, etc.  

I've certainly made it clear to my son that it's not worth bothering to qualify as an accountant.  If he wants to be an accountant, then he'll be working without qualifications and relying on good service and knowledge.

I don't really think the general public are bothered/impressed with the "chartered" tag anymore.  As the OP says, there are so many "chartered" bodies these days besides accountancy and I'm not sure having the royal "charter" really means much anymore.

I think the ACCA, ICAEW etc have really thrown the baby out with the bath water due to them being unable to find a way of merging and being far too interested in international matters (ACCA) and big companies (ACA).  They also seem more interested in students than their members.  

I've recently joined the ICPA who are far more in touch with small practitioners and actually provide real help, support, offers, etc.  -  ACCA and ICAEW could learn a thing or two from the ICPA.

Thanks (3)
avatar
31st Dec 2012 08:48

Totally agree the last post

ICPA are excellent for a sole trader like myself.  PII, tax insurance cover, online training of high quality - nearest ICAEW training is 100 miles for myself based in Lake District - monthly magazine which focuses on topics of practical relevance.  The list is endless.

All for £700.  I was offerred the excting opportunity to rejoin ICAEW for over £1,500 by someone who made it totally clear they really didn't give a toss one way or the other.  The only positive thing I can say is that he made the decision an easy one to make!

Meanwhile, the "cream" of our profession in my view have taken part in activities which have directly led to the recession being a lot worse than it needed to be.  Over 300 European banks needed major financial rescues, not a single one had a qualified audit report.  The fancy tax avoidance wheezes are a major industry for the big 4.

 

Thanks (6)
avatar
04th Jan 2013 14:44

ICPA?!

"International Corrections and Prisons Association"?

(Honest - it's what Google comes up with second.)

Thanks (0)
avatar
31st Dec 2012 09:19

The advent of computer accountancy/tax software instead of pen & ink/typing has all but eliminated the use of a "superior being" who could advise and counsel. I wonder how many acountants actually work at ICAEW rather than technicians and jobsworths of varying skills

Thanks (0)
avatar
31st Dec 2012 09:36

yes the ICAEW only were interested

when they wanted me to reapply to join and pay a hefty fee. they are pathetic the correspondence was truly appalling blaming me for not abiding by by laws etc . i would be happy to name and shame the appartickics ;-)

Thanks (2)
By tom123
31st Dec 2012 09:40

CIMA

Can I ask how you reach the conclusion that only ICAEW and ICAS can use the Chartered designation.

I am a Chartered Management Accountant.

Surely your friend is a Chartered Public Finance Accountant

Surely these are just differences of specialism driven by career route?

 

 

Happy new year to all btw,

 

Tom

Thanks (4)
avatar
31st Dec 2012 10:54

*

tom123 wrote:

Can I ask how you reach the conclusion that only ICAEW and ICAS can use the Chartered designation.

I am a Chartered Management Accountant.

Surely your friend is a Chartered Public Finance Accountant

Surely these are just differences of specialism driven by career route?

 

 

Happy new year to all btw,

 

Tom

 

Tom, if you don't already know, I would assume the answer to your question is this:

You may be a Chartered Management Accountant but you're not a "chartered accountant" and you're not supposed to call yourself one (if you do). I don't entirely agree with the OP's rant but I would guess that is what s/he meant as it winds me up as well (but that's just the inner grumpy old man in me as there's nothing to be done now about winding back in the proliferation of the term as Joe Public now thinks it equates to any sort of qualified accountant).

 

Have a good one!

Thanks (1)
avatar
By deg2yq
04th Jan 2013 23:33

My 2 pennies worth

Adam 'not supposed to' and OP - come out of your Rip Van Winkle sleep!!

Please show us where in the law that other members of other Chartered bodies cannot call themselves 'Chartered Accountants'?

The answer is - you will not find it just ask the Privvy Council

This was simply tradition but not law , custom but not fact.

The fact is the term' Chartered Accountant' is not protected by law and exclusive to ICAEW or ICAS.

Those old world bodies that still thrive on 19th Century snobbery.

ICAEW members in particular get their noses bent out of joint about this issue rather than contributing constructively to the accountancy profession.

However, I do agree that in terms of what one thinks of when they consider what duties an accountant in public practice should be ,professional qualified, and certified to do, only ICAEW, ICAS, and ACCA pass that test , as they are the only chartered bodies who study for and are formally trained and equipped to carry out work as genuine Chartered Accountants.

However, this OP appears to be centred around snobbery and self-centredness wanting to feel superior to others. With an attitude like that you will find it hard to relate to the SME market who really do not have time for people talking down to them from up on high.

I work both in the corporate sector and in practice 50:50 and I LOVE IT.

We are the new breed of non-uptight accountant , we convince people based our knowledge,experience and understanding of their individual circumstances.

However the term accountant should be protected but this is complicated as you need to consider members in industry without practicing lic or others simply employed as accountants but not in practice. If the term accountant were protected -where would that leave them?

Pehaps the term 'Chartered Accountant' should be protected to included only ACCA ( the global leader in the accountancy profession), ICAEW, ICAS in that order.

Regards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By neileg
31st Dec 2012 09:51

@Tom123

And I work with folks who are chartered engineers.

Chartered status means that the organisation has a royal charter. It's no more or less exclusive than that.

Thanks (4)
By Glennzy
31st Dec 2012 11:06

As A CIMA man

...... I Agree. Post qualification they have little interest in you other than to collect your annual membership fees. For me the Qualifcation is little more than a door opener, (particularly in industry to meet minimum job specs). I know Chartered Accountants who are terrible and I know QBE accountants who are brillaint at what they do.

When I was training in early 90's we used to have to stand up in the room when the senior partner walked in, and you were not allowed to call him by his first name until you had qualified.

It was this level of respect the position commanded that made me want to do it.

Internationally UK trained FCA, ACCA or CIMA still carry a lot of respect its only in the UK where recognition has diluted.

I also hold membership with the IFA and FTA which are similar to ICPA and are much more helpful and practical then the Chartered Institutes.

 

 

Thanks (1)
31st Dec 2012 14:29

Cheer up ....

are you telling me that as a Chartered accountant that there isn't a good living to be had? Is your lot such a bad one? I qualified ACCA but practice through the AAT for many reasons outlined above but life as a practising accountant is hardly a bad one regardless of how you go about it. There are much harder ways to earn a crust I'm quite sure and if I had my time again I would do exactly the same.

Thanks (1)
07th Jan 2013 08:31

Deleted by

Time for change.

I've simply no time, or inclination, to be associated with what some people term "professionals".

Thanks (0)
avatar
31st Dec 2012 18:30

Human nature

It is a fact of life, good or bad, we are all elitist. I have worked with many peoplein many different businesses, in many sectors and whether we like it or not we all have a pecking order which we are all aware of. The situtation in accountancy with the four bodies: ICAEW, ACCA, CIMA and CIPFA is clear, but boundaries are changing. I have worked with a large number of very impressive ACCA's and very capable CIMA's. The distinction between ICAEW and ACCA is blurred, times have changed and frankly a student can get a very good training in commerce without the need for a practice background.

Generalisations are always going to be criticised, but what's for certain the qualification in itself is not the ultimate factor when determining quality. There is a definate place for these different qualifications and specialisms, you won't get many ACA's wanting to go into the public sector so there is even a place of CIPFA. The four can coexist as they have for years. But you ask a CIMA or CIPFA what they think of a new start up qualifications and they too will look down on them (elitism).

I think we should recognise our differences and celebrate them. As I say I have worked with top class ACA's, ACCA's and CIMA's who all brought different skills to the table. But the approach of the governing bodies is at best laissez faire without cohesion or purpose. There is little in the way of member support, the "profession" and the members are suffering.

I suggest the term accountant should be protected and the four existing bodies should find a way to work together, ensure quality and sell the profession to the public who are disinterested and confused by the plethora of unqualified would be accountants out there.

 

Thanks (2)
avatar
By dstickl
01st Jan 2013 13:11

Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" wud disagree with 'protected'!

Anne.Onymous wrote:

It is a fact of life, good or bad, we are all elitist.   ...

Can you prove the above assertion of "fact", please?  Some of us out here are "ever so 'umble" ... 

Anne.Onymous wrote:

...     I have worked with a large number of ... very capable CIMA's.    ... 

Thank you; I'm an ACMA ... 

Anne.Onymous wrote:

...   I suggest the term accountant should be protected and the four existing bodies should find a way to work together, ensure quality and sell the profession to the public who are disinterested and confused by the plethora of unqualified would be accountants out there.

Sorry, NO, Anne.Onymous! As a graduate economist [as well as being a Physics graduate too] I'm totally opposed to the IMHO self-serving suggestion that QUOTE the term accountant should be protected ENDQUOTE as this could be building a monopoly, by erecting an un-necessary barrier to entry of what should be a "contestable market" - to use Billy Baumol's term - that is already regulated by English law, e.g. Companies Act 2006.  Also, I sense that Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" would disagree with the IMHO mischievous suggestion that 'the term accountant should be protected', on the grounds that the prices for accountancy services/work would be raised.  Happy New Year to all @ AWEB. 

Thanks (1)
01st Jan 2013 13:39

Desecration?

An interesting choice of words. I always thought that desecration referred to something holy or religious.

Thanks (3)
avatar
05th Jan 2013 00:29

I thought.....

ShirleyM wrote:

An interesting choice of words. I always thought that desecration referred to something holy or religious.

I thought it was something to do with coconut.

MtF

Thanks (1)
01st Jan 2013 13:44

We are not that special

Human nature to be elitist?  Only in the sort of human that wants to be that way.

There were a number of heated debates on here a couple of years ago about the protection, elitism (ivory tower?), vocational etc standing of "accountancy" and, no matter how you come at it, in 2013, the work associated with the job is a shadow of its former self and so, I'm afraid, you've missed the boat on any sort of protection.

When I qualified I carried out insolvency and investment work as well as auditing but as warranted by my own poor understanding and practice, the former 2 soon became separately regulated and so for 25ish years, the only benefit of the letters after my name were to be able to audit (and sign mortgage references) then, along with many on here, I gave up my audit registration.

So I'm now a bog standard accountant, with letters after my name, but with decades of experience.  After the years of exams & stuff, I too valued the letters but, as said to me by my senior partner when I took the office down the pub, "well done you've reached the first rung of the ladder".

Getting obsessive about a title and self importance is a waste of time when you are working for clients who, in the main, don't give a monkeys about your title or feelings of elitism, they just want a good job, for a reasonable fee.

Happy 2013 fellow bog standards!

Thanks (6)
02nd Jan 2013 08:15

Pretty much the end of the subject ....

and well summarised Paul. I would only add that the 'Chartered' end of the accounting market-place accounts for about 35% of the total .... difficult to see what difference protecting the brand would have as the market will still need the many unbranded foot soldiers to get the work done!

Thanks (0)
avatar
02nd Jan 2013 08:45

waste of time?

I'm ACCA qualified and echo many of the points above

 

however I worked damn hard to get my qualifications and am proud of them and keep my membership up for this reason

 

Does no one else here have a sense of pride in their achievements.......does this also translate to the work they produce?

Thanks (3)
avatar
04th Jan 2013 11:55

Proud ACCA member!

busacrun wrote:

I'm ACCA qualified and echo many of the points above

 

however I worked damn hard to get my qualifications and am proud of them and keep my membership up for this reason

 

Does no one else here have a sense of pride in their achievements.......does this also translate to the work they produce?

 

I am also ACCA qualified and proud to be! It is hard work, they don't just give these qualifications to anyone, and I value the 'Chartered' tag that goes with it.

I work for a small practice, as an employee, and I have found the support from ACCA to be great. I just pick up the phone and ask away, this is definitely worth the membership fee!!

Thanks (3)
avatar
By deg2yq
05th Jan 2013 00:11

ACCA really support and help their members

lauradalton wrote:

busacrun wrote:

I'm ACCA qualified and echo many of the points above

 

however I worked damn hard to get my qualifications and am proud of them and keep my membership up for this reason

 

Does no one else here have a sense of pride in their achievements.......does this also translate to the work they produce?

 

I am also ACCA qualified and proud to be! It is hard work, they don't just give these qualifications to anyone, and I value the 'Chartered' tag that goes with it.

I work for a small practice, as an employee, and I have found the support from ACCA to be great. I just pick up the phone and ask away, this is definitely worth the membership fee!!

You said it brother. Those ACCAs slaming ACCA support are just pathetic. I could not be prouder of them. I feel very fortunate to be part of this oerganization.

They really support their members

Thanks (1)
avatar
02nd Jan 2013 08:59

The qualification only means anything if...

... you are trying to get a PAYE job; then it will open doors for you,

 

What you do when the door is open remains up to you.

Thanks (0)
avatar
02nd Jan 2013 09:08

I wonder how the various Chartered Institutes present value for money

for their members'clients compared with a QBE accountant.

Not I suspect

Thanks (1)
02nd Jan 2013 10:30

The grass isn't always greener on the other side

A friend who is an IT consultant (albeit a very good one) earns £1,500 a day does not pay membership fees, does not pay PII, has no governing body, did not have to study professional qualifications, does not need to do CPD.

I think your friend would be quite upset by your comments about CPD. I was in IT before changing over to accountancy. IT is such a fast moving technology that he/she probably spends a lot of time & money on keeping up to date, far more than most accountants who just do the minimum required. You don't earn £1,500 a day by being years out of date, in fact you wouldn't earn anything at all as no one would engage your services.

I have employed FCA's in the past, and some were good, and some were hopeless as they hadn't kept up to date. CPD is vital for virtually all trades/professions, and not just because some professional body demands it.

Thanks (3)
02nd Jan 2013 11:06

@busacrum

I understand entirely what you mean (hard work to get the letters & pride in your achievement), despite it being a long time ago I can still remember feeling that way, it had been the be-all & end-all of my waking (and non-waking) hours for 5 years and so, yes I felt on top of the world, for about a year.

X decades on, in practice, none of my existing or potential clients mention the qualification and I'm not alone in asking what my continued membership actually gets me.  I'm afraid pride in those 5 years and the exam passes XX decades ago doesn't pay the mortgage and so the annual membership fees have to be seen in the light of what work they bring me today and what support my reg body provides.

Yes, there might be some punters out there who, when faced with a decision over 2 equally capable accountants, will err on the side of the one with letters but as 95% of clients come from recommendation that doesn't benefit me.

As far as direct support is concerned, my body runs good and well priced CPD courses but they are open to anyone and the providers are sub-contract trainers.  The website is dreadful and my attempts to get this and other support avenues improved, have gone unanswered.  Finally, I wasted 3 years of my life on a formal complaint about a cowboy member that came to nothing.

I'll give it a year or two, ask current & prospective clients whether the letters mean anything to them and will probably decide that enough is enough and spend the saved money on a week away each year.

Thanks (1)
02nd Jan 2013 11:20

Want some fish

to go with the chips (on shoulders)?

Chartered - big deal.

I'm ICAEW but I don't go on about it, as Paul has mentioned very few prospective clients are interested, let alone ask.

I'll stay a member for now as I value the qualification but if anyone asks what I do I say 'accountant' I never mention the chartered bit unless they specifically ask.

What's far more important for clients is that (in no particular order):

1. You know what you're doing.

2. Are a member of an Institute/Professional Body.

3. Have PI cover.

 

Happy New Year!

 

Thanks (2)
avatar
By dstickl
02nd Jan 2013 19:03

Good client Q: "Have you ever been sued, why and what happened?"

Kent accountant wrote:

...  What's far more important for clients is that (in no particular order):

1. You know what you're doing.

2. Are a member of an Institute/Professional Body.

3. Have PI cover.

A good potential client could consider asking a professional this QUESTION: "Have you ever been sued, why, and what happened?" 

I did that with a Patent Agent (PA) who said "That's a very interesting question, Mr [dstickl], the answer is yes, once, and the background was as follows: .... ".  Result: I was so impressed with the PA's answer that I had no hesitation in going ahead with him, because he had covered Kent's above point 1. 

Other accountants - "Chartered" or otherwise - might consider being as "Prepared" 

Thanks (0)
By tom123
02nd Jan 2013 13:27

Celebrate diversity of the profession.

We are nearly at 1000 reads for this thread - which is impressive.

I am quite happy with the 'management' part of my designation, and have certainly never omitted it. That was the route I chose to go down at the start of my career.

I work in the manufacturing sector, and have ACA and ACCA colleagues - so there is room for everyone out there. Whilst I love the insights I get into the practice world through the window of Aweb, I have no particular desire to switch -

Good luck wherever our jobs take us this year.

Thanks (1)
02nd Jan 2013 13:56

Desecration

The same thing happened to coconut you know.

Thanks (3)
avatar
05th Jan 2013 00:40

Okay...

George Attazder wrote:

The same thing happened to coconut you know.

I guess I'm too slow then.

MtF

Thanks (0)
avatar
02nd Jan 2013 15:59

Age matters

As one gets older and the prospect of retirement nears, I see little point in paying (wasting) subs to a body that does absolutely nothing for me and my membership of which is of no interest to my clients. 3 or 4 years saved subs will pay for a very nice retirement holiday.

I think for youngsters setting out on their career proof of qualification and membership is of importance, but there comes a point where it is of zero relevance, that point being somewhere around the 55-60 year old mark.

 

Thanks (2)
02nd Jan 2013 16:42

practical effect?

If I'm no longer a member of ICAEW, ACCA, etc, then I realise I could no longer state "Bloggs & Co, Chartered etc Accountants". It would have to be, say "Bloggs & Co, Business/Tax Accountants".

Also, I could no longer use FCA/FCCA/ACA , etc after my name.

However, I wonder if you could use "FCA (retired)"? Or some other way of showing that you had the qualification and passed the exams? "Former FCA"? "Ex-FCA"?

Thanks (1)
avatar
02nd Jan 2013 16:52

Some websites say "xxxx qualified as a chartered accountant in

I've noticed that quite a few websites from "unqualified" accountants say "xxxx qualified as a chartered accountant in 19xx" on the home page or "about us" page. I can't see anything wrong with that as it's a factual statement for someone who used to be a chartered accountant but has given up their membership.

 

Thanks (1)
avatar
04th Jan 2013 11:48

Misleading isn't it though?

Ken Howard wrote:

I've noticed that quite a few websites from "unqualified" accountants say "xxxx qualified as a chartered accountant in 19xx" on the home page or "about us" page. I can't see anything wrong with that as it's a factual statement for someone who used to be a chartered accountant but has given up their membership.

 

 

Misleading

What they are saying is I value the chartered badge as a means to hawk my services to you...but I do not subscribe to the professional values any more or I was kicked out for unprofessional conduct or some other reason. But I am quite happy for you to believe I am still a chartered accountant.....but much cheaper......or at least you won't see the cost until the enquiry.

Would you really give up your membership for a few hundred quid? Yeah right.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By alattax
02nd Jan 2013 17:34

That's basically what I reply on mortgage references if asked what my qualification is.

I say I qualified as FCA in 1977 but no longer subscribe to membership.

(Slight poetic licence as I didn't get FCA until 5 years later).

 

Thanks (0)
03rd Jan 2013 09:23

@Red Leader

As & when I drop my membership (and if I decide to continue doing numbers) I'll put on my CV (or gravestone)

"Used to practice as a Chartered Certified Accountant but can now do it properly"

Thanks (2)
03rd Jan 2013 10:16

Client Perspective
My experience has been clients assume that the person has passed the relevant exams and is a member of a prof body when they see the word accountant.

I do not see any QBE's saying on their website I do not hold any accountancy qualification but I am QBE'S.

I have seen QBE'S who far more experienced and better than I am and they are competent. My point is they are implying to have passed the relevant exams and member of exams and experienced based prof body.

Thanks (1)
avatar
03rd Jan 2013 11:31

@firsttab....not

sure how you can imply you are 'chartered' by merely saying you are an accountant.  When i go to get some marketing advice I don't ask if they are chartered...i ask to see their work, what they can do for me etc.

Thanks (0)
avatar
03rd Jan 2013 20:57

Doctors, dentists, architects, solicitors

Based on some comments in the thread, why not deregulate other professions and let in more "competition" forget about quality its not important. Lets open the term doctor up for general use. The 5 years training at medical school is over rated when all that is really needed is a GSCE in art, some good luck and to have watched a couple of episodes of casualty. God it sounds that easy that maybe even a chartered accountant could do it and I've hours of practice playing operation as a child. Yours faithfully Dr Onymous (fixed fees on all operations, none of which are guaranteed but willing to give anything a go and hope for the best).

Thanks (4)
avatar
By dstickl
04th Jan 2013 21:52

100% professional integrity RE: Doctors, dentists ...

Anne.Onymous wrote:

Based on some comments in the thread, why not deregulate other professions and let in more "competition" forget about quality its not important. Lets open the term doctor up for general use. The 5 years training at medical school is over rated when all that is really needed is a GSCE in art, some good luck and to have watched a couple of episodes of casualty. God it sounds that easy that maybe even a chartered accountant could do it and I've hours of practice playing operation as a child. Yours faithfully Dr Onymous (fixed fees on all operations, none of which are guaranteed but willing to give anything a go and hope for the best).

As the matter of professional integrity has ben raised earlier in this thread by other posters, and whilst I feel sure that OP has some integrity, I'm concerned that the above words of OP might perhaps just possibly be mis-interpreted to indicate support for a return to the old fashioned nonsense of QUOTE the operation was a success, but the patient died in theatre ENDQUOTE that IMHO could perhaps just possibly (perish the thought) indicate something less than 100% professional integrity. 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Old Greying Accountant
05th Jan 2013 12:50

Although ...

Anne.Onymous wrote:

Based on some comments in the thread, why not deregulate other professions and let in more "competition" forget about quality its not important. Lets open the term doctor up for general use. The 5 years training at medical school is over rated when all that is really needed is a GSCE in art, some good luck and to have watched a couple of episodes of casualty. God it sounds that easy that maybe even a chartered accountant could do it and I've hours of practice playing operation as a child. Yours faithfully Dr Onymous (fixed fees on all operations, none of which are guaranteed but willing to give anything a go and hope for the best).

... you need to be qualified to call yourself a Doctor, you don't actually need to be a doctor to perform surgery on or administer to a human, although to do anything more than rudimenatry first aid on an animal there are stringent legal requirements.

That said, just because you are a doctor, doesn't mean your a medical doctor. You could be a doctor of Engineering and set your self up in a medical practice and the majority people would assume because you are Dr Bloggs you are a medical doctor! 

Thanks (0)
03rd Jan 2013 21:48

Here we go again!

We are not Doctors, and we are not comparable to Doctors. We are more comparable to the guy who services your car!

Most of the qualified ones (who do a 5 yr apprenticeship & sit exams) exist in the expensive dealerships. The QBE's (and some fully qualified's) make a very nice living at the local garage. The dealerships don't automatically equate to quality, and many local garages are excellent.

Thanks (6)
avatar
By deg2yq
04th Jan 2013 23:51

QBE should not practice

that is mal practice. You are using self-centred logic to justify your situation .. understandable ... but flawed

The Doctor /Lawyer logic is accurate.. pqualified accountants are not mechanics, or plumbers , or electricians .. they don't earn enough

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
03rd Jan 2013 22:42

Protection

I don’t know why people go on about “protecting” the term accountant. It will never happen. The term Chartered Accountant is already protected. What is wrong is that the public have never been educated in the difference between the two, and that is the fault of the professional bodies.  Surely it is their place to educate the public of the advantages of engaging a Chartered Accountant as opposed to any other type of accountant.

Of course there is an argument that 9 times out of 10 the only advantage is that you will be charged a higher fee. Let’s face facts, 90% of self employed compliance work is carried out just as efficiently by QBE’s as it is by chartered accountants.

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
04th Jan 2013 10:21

I suppose if we are going to 'protect'

accountant....then we should protect 'tax adviser', afterall why would you let an accountant loose on your tax affairs when their time in training in the art of tax is a couple of modules.....

So to do accounts and prepare the respective tax computations you should be a chartered accountant and chartered tax adviser....I guess there are some who will be very happy with that although i suspect the client may have a slightly higher bill???

Thanks (3)

Pages