Last week I contributed to the debate on company formation. Time to declare an interest - I am director of Formations Direct Ltd . Back to the matter in hand. It was clear from the debate that the lowest common denominator was whether it is worth paying to have a relationship with a formation agent. I suppose there is a natural follow-on to that , which is , is it worth a client paying to have a relationship with an accountant ? Are face to face meetings and telephone chats really necessary or can the client relationship be managed by email or through a website ?
Like the company formation debate the answer is simply - you get what you pay for and you supply a service commensurate with how much you are being paid for it. There's nothing quite like pitching a question to a client and watching the body language tell you something which is at odds with what is tripping off their tongue , or listening to a pregnant pause during a telephone conversation. It's not about scoring points it is about being able to give the best advice as a consequence of havign developed a relationship.
At FD we're not short of accounatnts who tried to cheapskate and do their own formations for a fiver or whatever. But as soon as they have a complex one or a problem with their own formation they are on the phone to us like a shot - it's more uncomfortable for them than us and can be more costly when we have to bale them out .Oh yes . A couple of final thoughts - if they are forming the companies for flumpence are they passing the saving on to their client or trousering the difference ? And when they find out that they should have done it differently do they own up ?