You might also be interested in
Replies (11)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
I wish I had caused the collapse of the banking system...
...instead I wrote one badly wordly letter to a client who was complaining about his £100 SAR bill, dismissing his complaint as froth whilst I was clinically diagnosed as being insane and I was fined £30,000 and thrown out of the ICAEW.
I was then deigned the right of appeal against this decision because I had not made my appeal in the allotted time because I was sectioned under the mental health act during the 28 days the ICAEW gave to me.
By punishing me in this way and my deigning my right of appeal, the ICAEW allowed my business partners to take my £1,000,000 of equity away from me without any compensation and dismissed my complaint about the actions of these partners as "a commercial dispute" and not one they could become involved with.
The ICAEW then strung me along for 2 years " considering my case" insisting that I submit legal paper after legal paper - which cost £'000's to have prepaired - before telling me - when all possibility of appeal by way of Judicial Review of through the European Courts of Human Rights was expired - that my case would not be reconsidered.
Whats more, on 6 occasions I have contacted CCAB trying to get help and on six occasions I have been ignored and when I tried to go public and posted a video on Youtube about my situation I was threatened with more litigation from the glorious ICAEW until such time as I took down the posting.
So, you can see why I wish I had caused the collapse of the international banking system!, my punishment would have been trivial when compared with the crime of becoming ill.
Albert Camus
ICAEW Investigating Committee
Whilst not knowing the full facts of all cases there does appear to be a certain amount of leniency given by the ICAEW to the FD of Northern Rock compared to other reprimands/fines etc meted out.
Is this a case of double standards at the ICAEW?
Lazy journalism
"When the full extent of the bank’s dodgy loan book came to light, the bank collapsed and was nationalised".
The mythology continues and deepens: Northern Rock did not collapse because of bad debts; it was purely cash flow caused by inter-bank lending ceasing up - a factor that no-one in the world predicted.
I hear so much of the media stating that Northern Rock was involved in the Sub-Prime market; it was not!
Ironically, Northern Rock was sunk by a side effect of the dubious practices in which most of the other banks were involved. The other banks were bailed out - Northern Rock was not.
More specific to this story, the figures he concealed would have taken the mortgages in arrears up from .42% to .68% of the loan book. The Council of Mortgage Lenders average was .89%. Now that gives it a different perspective, does'nt it?
Serious offences minor fines
I have to agree with RichBatoul. The ICAEW is great at imposing relatively major fines for minor alleged offences (with no actual "proof" just someone's say so) and yet someone earning this sort of money who did actually do something wrong (by his admission and the FSA's findings) gets what is for him a very small slap on the wrist. Quite clearly the ICAEW is run for a certain sort of Chartered Accountant by a certain sort of Chartered Accountant and those starting out in sole practice or with very minor offences are not really wanted at all.
Serious offences minor fines
In response to Frustrated Accountant, there does seem to be a very uneven playing field here for members of the ICAEW.
A review of the ICAEW code of Ethics includes the following statement:-
"ICAEW believes that integrity is fundamental to ethical behaviour"
Does anyone remember the Barlow Clowes affair of the 1980's and what became of the ICAEW members implicated in that financial situation?
Is this just another case of "jobs for the boys"?
Too true
I totally agree RichBatoul. And it's not just me. The lack of evidence required (just someone's say so) for finding a member "guilty" is staggering. And it's also playing fast and loose with the law on defamation. Having discussed this with an ex-member of the Standards Committee it's not just those being accused of wrongdoing who think the Committee is out of touch with the world inhabited by large numbers of their members.
See http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/1764717/icaews-disciplinary-process-criticised
A member found guilty of child [***] offences was fined just £1,000 as was someone convicted of drink driving. If those offences are abohorrent to the vast majority of the membership and think it an exceedingly serious matter then I'd be very surprised.
This also shows how the head of DTE
"said the institute was hammering firms for ‘technical offences’ while allowing members guilty of serious crimes to retain membership and face small financial penalties."
What was the point of that, ICAEW?
What a joke. I bet he never even noticed it - and to be fair, why should he?
What was the point of that - it's all a bit "too little too late".