Are there any of you who are members of the Institute of Financial Accountants. If so have you had any problems with lenders when issuing an accountants certificate for clients mortgage application.
Replies (23)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
The answer to your questions are
Yes, I am and No, I haven't.
I am however a "one man band" and don't have many clients who require unusually large mortgages.
However, a client has just bought a Business Freehold Property for £600k (valued at substantially more) with a 90% business loan from Nat West and they were more than happy to accept my accounts and tax return figures. The client has been with the bank for a very long time and I have also acted for the client for over 20 years, so there is a good ongoing business relationship.
Are you sure
Many lenders' list the qualifications they will accept. Very seldom have I seen IFA
Really? We have completed hundreds and never seen one where AFA and FFA are not recognised.
Probably mistaken
Must of have been thinking of the likes of IATA, CAA and ABTA members of which organisations we act for.
IFA
The Institute of Financial Accountants is a full member of the IFAC, and as such there should be no problems with providing references.
The IFAC membership places the IFA 'alongside the UK and Ireland’s six chartered bodies, as well as 135 national and regional accountancy organisations, representing 125 countries and jurisdictions'. <http://www.ifa.org.uk/about-us/ifac/> The trouble is that not every lender is up to date with this information/recognition.
Understood
I think the problem is with the signing off of accounts which I would agree simply does not make sense. Why is not an IFA's qualification not as valid as an ACA ?
IFA
The whole point about IFA's recognition by the IFAC is that it is a qualification that is now on a par with the CCAB bodies such as the ACA.
That's good
The whole point about IFA's recognition by the IFAC is that it is a qualification that is now on a par with the CCAB bodies such as the ACA.
The IFAC must get in touch with the likes of IATA, CAA and ABTA and tell them to stop being so silly . Why should you guys be treated any different to us ?
Recognition
The IFAC must get in touch with the likes of IATA, CAA and ABTA and tell them to stop being so silly . Why should you guys be treated any different to us ?The whole point about IFA's recognition by the IFAC is that it is a qualification that is now on a par with the CCAB bodies such as the ACA.
A few years ago, I was reading the accountant requirements of a property related trade body (can't remember which, I think it was an residential lettings association who required members/potential members to submit certified accounts), at the time they only recognised ACCA/ICAE/ICAS/ICAI - this was because these were the qualifications recognised by the Companies Act! I assume that the trade body had seen these qualifications in the act and neglected that this was in relation to audit, or thought that audit and accounts prep are the same! Maybe the IATA, CAA and ABTA are thinking the same...? If so, then it will be up to the IFA and/or the IFAC to instigate some recognition/education on who should be able to prepare accounts.
I don't follow
As William Marshall says IFAC is treated on a par with ACA . It must follow that their audit qualifications are just as recognised as the ICAEWThe IFAC must get in touch with the likes of IATA, CAA and ABTA and tell them to stop being so silly . Why should you guys be treated any different to us ?The whole point about IFA's recognition by the IFAC is that it is a qualification that is now on a par with the CCAB bodies such as the ACA.
A few years ago, I was reading the accountant requirements of a property related trade body (can't remember which, I think it was an residential lettings association who required members/potential members to submit certified accounts), at the time they only recognised ACCA/ICAE/ICAS/ICAI - this was because these were the qualifications recognised by the Companies Act! I assume that the trade body had seen these qualifications in the act and neglected that this was in relation to audit, or thought that audit and accounts prep are the same! Maybe the IATA, CAA and ABTA are thinking the same...? If so, then it will be up to the IFA and/or the IFAC to instigate some recognition/education on who should be able to prepare accounts.
Recognition
IFA don't offer any audit qualification and whilst the IFAC do have educational standards, they don't have the authority/status to accredit qualifications and status for statutory audit, that's for local legislation. As William Marshall says IFAC is treated on a par with ACA . It must follow that their audit qualifications are just as recognised as the ICAEW
The point I was making is that third parties who require accounts to be "certified" in someway don't always seem to have an understanding of what accountants actually do and/or verify when it comes to preparing a set of accounts and so rely on some other point of view when making a decision on what is satisfactory. I've heard of a local authority who required audited accounts from a sole-trader tradesmen, when he informed them he doesn't have/require an audit the local authority told him he could audit them himself! Basically they just wanted someone to testify to the validity of the accounts! A lot of non-accountants seem to think that an accountants report expresses an opinion of accuracy or "validity" on financial accounts and that only an accountant can officially prepare financial statements for an entity.
Am I missing something?
The whole point about IFA's recognition by the IFAC is that it is a qualification that is now on a par with the CCAB bodies such as the ACA.
Not being familiar with IFA I got on their website and they claim you can qualify " in as little as one year " I know there is the odd genius but that's quite a claim. It also goes on to say that it avoids training in some aspects of accounting including audits. How then may I ask can the IFA be on par with an ACA? Am I missing something here !
Hell, if I had known that earlier
The whole point about IFA's recognition by the IFAC is that it is a qualification that is now on a par with the CCAB bodies such as the ACA.
I would not have wasted 5 years of my life and a further 3 before I could get on the ladder
On what grounds ?
are you making this claim? What is your source to support your claim?The whole point about IFA's recognition by the IFAC is that it is a qualification that is now on a par with the CCAB bodies such as the ACA.
I don't know anything about IFA but in terms of professional qualifications there are two types - recognised qualifying bodies and recognised supervisory bodies. There are only 4 bodies which are both RQBs and RSBs - these are ACCA, ICAEW/S/I. Outside audit and insolvency work nothing matters though!
Correct
I don't know anything about IFA but in terms of professional qualifications there are two types - recognised qualifying bodies and recognised supervisory bodies. There are only 4 bodies which are both RQBs and RSBs - these are ACCA, ICAEW/S/I. Outside audit and insolvency work nothing matters though!
I think William Marshall is given to gross exaggeration if not hyperbole
Anyone who thinks this Mickey Mouse qualification is on par with ACCA, ICAEW etc is delusional.
Is the IFA
not pushing for Chartered status over next few years now that it has merged with the Austrailian outfit. A tad harsh with the "Mickey Mouse" comment, I don't think anyone was claiming it was on par with a FCA or ACCA, simply saying it is accepted by most banks is a difference. It should also be noted that many IFA members have held Chartered status (me for one) but given it up to go with a body who helps smaller traders like the IFA does.
IFA
Glenzy is quite right.
The IFA is not recognised for audit purposes. The exam structure is not exactly the same as that of other institutes but it is not serving the same potential pool of members. It has recently merged with the Institute of Public Accountants of Australia and my understanding is that it is actively seeking advice on making a submission to the Privy Council for Chartered Status.
Here is a link to the IFA's explanation of its membership of the IFAC and the relevance of it to members <http://www.ifa.org.uk/about-us/ifac/> and for the uninitiated here is a link to the Privy Council website that expalins what is required to obtain a Royal Charter <http://privycouncil.independent.gov.uk/royal-charters/applying-for-a-roy...
I have been running my own practice as an IFA member for 26 years without problems in providing financial references. In my experience, competence counts more than anything else.
Not true
not pushing for Chartered status over next few years now that it has merged with the Austrailian outfit. A tad harsh with the "Mickey Mouse" comment, I don't think anyone was claiming it was on par with a FCA or ACCA, simply saying it is accepted by most banks is a difference. It should also be noted that many IFA members have held Chartered status (me for one) but given it up to go with a body who helps smaller traders like the IFA does.
William Marshall categorically states that an IFA is on par with an ACA which is what I could not get my head around . In his later posts he appears to change that stance . I am still waiting for his response as to how he based that claim.
υπερβολή
I wrote, 'The whole point about IFA's recognition by the IFAC is that it is a qualification that is now on a par with the CCAB bodies such as the ACA' and I have agreed with Glenzzy's additional explanation that put my comment firmly in context to which itbelonged, 'I don't think anyone was claiming it was on par with a FCA or ACCA, simply saying it is accepted by most banks is a difference'.
To bring the thread back on topic, the original enquirer or any other members of the IFA having difficulties with lenders should contact the Institute for further guidance.