Unethical Use of Name?

Unethical Use of Name?

Didn't find your answer?

Some time ago, when I was looking for an accountant, I met with a Chartered Accountant, based on personal referral, and having checked his website.  I chose not to engage his services.

He does not use an office, and his website uses a business name, let's call it "PDQ Consultancy," but since he doesn't use an office, I don't know to what extent that name is used by him elsewhere.  His site does not say he is a chartered accountant, but does say he offers accountancy services.  The website does not give his name, though it could be deduced from the email address listed.

I have confirmed, however, on his professional body's site, that he is indeed a chartered accountant -- but "PDQ Consultancy" does not appear there. 

It struck me as a little strange that he was using "PDQ" and didn't list it on his professional body's site.  It seemed strange that he didn't list, on his website, his actual name or the fact that he was a member of a highly respected professional body.  I never asked him about those things, and I was not entirely comfortable with engaging him for one or two other reasons, anyway.  But in finalising my decision, I happened to check, and I found that "PDQ Consultancy Limited" (the exact same name, but a ltd co) actually exists in the UK (though not in the same country as the accountant).

It seemed to me unethical to use "PDQ" if a limited company owns the name and is apparently trading.  And I wondered if that is why PDQ doesn't appear on his listing with his professional body, and if that is why his professional body and name isn't listed on his PDQ website.  But I'm not familiar with ethical standards for accountants, etc.

So I'd like to ask other accountants -- is this an ethical concern, and something of which his professional body would want to be informed?  Or should I just get on with my own business?  This has been bugging me for a while.  I don't want to make waves where none are needed, but if something inappropriate is happening that I happened to stumble upon, I don't want to turn a blind eye, either.  Would appreciate any thoughts / guidance anyone wants to give.

Replies (25)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

By Tim Vane
17th Sep 2015 13:11

No, he is not being unethical using the name. He may be in breach of other rules, who knows? Life's too short.

Thanks (0)
By johngroganjga
17th Sep 2015 13:13

If he is qualified, and a practising member of the professional body he belongs to, the name under which he practises should appear on the list of practising member firms of that body. If it doesn't, by all means feel free to ask that body why.  They will be very interested if he is in practice without a practising certificate, or under a style or name that they are not aware of.

To all intents and purposes he can practise under whatever name he likes.

Thanks (0)
Portia profile image
By Portia Nina Levin
17th Sep 2015 13:18

My doctors surgery's website makes no mention of the names of the doctors, just the surgery name, and whilst the individual doctors are registered with the GMC, the surgery is not.

Is having an inadequate website unethical now?

Thanks (1)
By johngroganjga
17th Sep 2015 13:22

Website?

The issue is not the website but the name under which he seems to be practising without the knowledge of his professional body.

Thanks (2)
RLI
By lionofludesch
17th Sep 2015 13:56

Struggling

I'm struggling to find anything objectionable here.

Is there a grudge involved ?

Thanks (1)
By johngroganjga
17th Sep 2015 14:09

If there is a problem it is an accountant practising under a name which is unknown to his professional body - which is course is a big problem.

Why the OP is making a crusade out of it I have no idea.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By justsotax
17th Sep 2015 14:08

some people just have too

much time on their hands....

Thanks (1)
Portia profile image
By Portia Nina Levin
17th Sep 2015 14:27

John

Might the problem not simply be that the professional body has (i) a list of members (individuals), and (ii) a separate list of registered firms.

Those on the latter might not necessarily be on the former, and if only the former is checked (which is what the OP appears to have done) then it is hardly surprising that the cupboard was bare.

Thanks (1)
David Winch
By David Winch
17th Sep 2015 14:50

A couple of possibilities

Is it possible that he is trading through a limited company, say ABC Ltd and that PDQ is simply a trading name of ABC Ltd.  It may be that his professional body has the practice listed under ABC Ltd.

Another possibility is that PDQ is not controlled by Mr X but that there are other shareholders & directors or partners in PDQ.  Therefore PDQ may not be entitled to describe itself as chartered accountants.

Indeed Mr X may simply be an employee of PDQ.

I suggest the OP should just forget it & move on.

David

Thanks (2)
Nichola Ross Martin
By Nichola Ross Martin
17th Sep 2015 15:17

I agree with David

move on.

There are loads of sites which fail to give you the id of their owner. Whilst some must be automated websites created by domain collectors, quite why anyone who has human customers thinks that this is impressive sure foxes me.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By NotAnAcctantJustReading
17th Sep 2015 15:41

Moving on

Ha!  No grudge or crusade.  Never done a thing about it until almost a year later when I decided to ask the question anonymously.

In case anyone was curious, two things bothered me: 1) advertising/practicing under a name which "belongs" to someone else, another limited company 2) practicing under a name not listed with the professional body.

That said, apparently there is no major issue that leaves me with any moral responsibility to follow up, and I appreciate your help. 

Thanks (0)
Replying to petersaxton:
paddle steamer
By DJKL
17th Sep 2015 16:30

The issue with ownership of name (Brand)

NotAnAcctantJustReading wrote:

Ha!  No grudge or crusade.  Never done a thing about it until almost a year later when I decided to ask the question anonymously.

In case anyone was curious, two things bothered me: 1) advertising/practicing under a name which "belongs" to someone else, another limited company 2) practicing under a name not listed with the professional body.

That said, apparently there is no major issue that leaves me with any moral responsibility to follow up, and I appreciate your help. 

The issue with the name is not clear cut, for all you know the limited Company is using his registered name, not the other way around. When Companies House allow a name to a company that does not mean the company  has copright/brand/ registered ownership re same- in fact one of my clients needed to change the name of their company because A N Other had registered the name (not as a company) and objected to their use despite Companies House having been happy to issue them the name for the company, right to use the name is not something Companies House check.

Where trading standards etc may get involved is if is evident that the party is trying to misrepresent themselves as the other, but that is a distinctly different matter,and I think they would only be interested if both had similar business/activity.

By chance I spotted one last night (retirement to the Isles-wishful thinking) that made me smile, see this link for a Tesco variant on Coll, see last one listed:

http://www.visitcoll.co.uk/Coll.php?p=shops

Thanks (0)
By SteveHa
17th Sep 2015 15:59

You don't know for certain that the name does belong to someone else. He may have the company registered elsewhere from his trading address.

Thanks (1)
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
17th Sep 2015 16:17

.

I deliberately don't list our practice on the ICAEW website as it just generates a load of direct mail.  The only people to buy the ICAEW publication of UK accountants are........sales people.

Real customers don't look there.

You can however ring up the ICAEW and confirm I am a member and have all the bits of paper on the wall. Fat lot of good it does to my tax knowledge of course. 

 

Thanks (0)
By Bungo
17th Sep 2015 16:46

Jones & Son?

I set up my own Ltd company recently, as I was browsing through the directory of companies I noticed that there were loads of companies with similar names to each other.  It isn't unusual at all.  There are probably a lot of unincorporated businesses with similar names as well, "Jones & Son" for example.

Him not mentioning that he is a member of a professional body on the business website makes me think maybe he hasn't got a practicing certificate.  It isn't illegal not to have practicing certificate, but it is against the internal rules of the accounting body to practise without one.  The Catch 22 for accountants from industry is that it is hard (impossible?) to get one without being in practice.  He maybe hasn't plucked up the courage to resign from his professional firm yet.

 

Thanks (0)
RLI
By lionofludesch
17th Sep 2015 17:03

"Passing off"

It's fine to have the same business name (as opposed to company name) so long as you don't pretend to be the other party.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By NotAnAcctantJustReading
17th Sep 2015 18:24

Trying to move on....

but to clarify, "PDQ Consultancy" (the accountant) and "PDQ Consultancy Ltd" are definitely not one and the same, the accountant is clearly a one-man band, older man, been an accountant for a long time, address listed with his professional body is an address of another business of which he is a director..  

Ltd is several hundred miles away, two directors, different sector.  Neither is claiming to be the other, though the names are identical.

So pretty clearly nothing to see here other than perhaps the fact that his trading name isn't listed with his professional body.  But nothing that should make a member of the public care, and the fact that I asked the question only revealed my ignorance which you all have helped to rectify.  Sorry for troubling you, and thank you for the help.

Thanks (0)
Replying to johngroganjga:
By Bungo
18th Sep 2015 17:51

We all got that

NotAnAcctantJustReading wrote:

but to clarify, "PDQ Consultancy" (the accountant) and "PDQ Consultancy Ltd" are definitely not one and the same, the accountant is clearly a one-man band, older man, been an accountant for a long time, address listed with his professional body is an address of another business of which he is a director..  

Ltd is several hundred miles away, two directors, different sector.  Neither is claiming to be the other, though the names are identical.

So pretty clearly nothing to see here other than perhaps the fact that his trading name isn't listed with his professional body.  But nothing that should make a member of the public care, and the fact that I asked the question only revealed my ignorance which you all have helped to rectify.  Sorry for troubling you, and thank you for the help.

I think we all got that, yes there is another business with a similar name. The point is there is nothing wrong with this.

Thanks (0)
By Tim Vane
17th Sep 2015 18:27

But the names aren't identical. One has "Ltd". That's the all important difference.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By petestar1969
18th Sep 2015 12:02

What fun

Accounting Workshop Ltd, Accounting Workshop (UK) LLP and Accounting Workshop (simple partnership) all exist......

A name is just a name......

Thanks (0)
@enanen
By enanen
18th Sep 2015 12:12

oh for the love of.....

Thanks (1)
avatar
By BizzyBizExpert
18th Sep 2015 13:43

Enterprise Act

The one issue that nobody seems to have noticed here is that the Enterprise Act requires that all electronic media including websites and email display the trading status and trading name, company trading address and registered address plus the company registration number and VAT number.

Emails should show an email signature with these details and a disclaimer.

All of this is a legal requirement for any business entity, sole trader, partnership, LLP, social enterprise or charity! 

 

Thanks (1)
7om
By Tom 7000
18th Sep 2015 16:46

tell you what...

call his institute, speak to the ethics people and see if they care ;)

Easy answer

Thanks (0)
By Tim Vane
18th Sep 2015 17:49

@BizzyBizExpert - your interpretation seems to be at odds with most legal advice available for sole traders (which I'm assuming this is). Do you have a link to the specific legislation which specifies these requirements?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By keithas
19th Sep 2015 14:08

Why is everyone being so defensive?

The OP may have read too much into what he perceived which is why he was checking his facts. What's wrong with that?

In a world where I see so many getting into difficulties because they haven't checked the backgrounds of companies or individuals that they are dealing with, I think that this should be applauded.

I have recently become aware of an individual who calls himself a Chartered Accountant on one of his many websites when he has no such qualification. He serially sets up Ltd Cos and then files no returns, is eventually struck off, with no further repercussions, and then just starts up a new co. He is not even consistant between different websites as to his supposed qualifications and experience.
He has recently been appointed to the board of a charity. All the information I have discovered is freely available but no one bothers to check.

So, once again, thanks to the OP for trying to do the right thing.

Thanks (4)