Share this content

Client bookkeeping, asked to pay suppliers update

Client bookkeeping, asked to pay suppliers update

Didn't find your answer?

Following my recent posting 'Client bookkeeping, asked to pay suppliers' the consensus was to leave this well alone and I fully understand this.

It seems that this is permitted by ICAEW, AAT and others but, in my case, it is not covered by our PI insurance so a non starter.

Is completing this part of the work as a part-time employee a solution?

Working practices would not change (all done remotely from our dedicated home office) but could we make supplier payments under a zero hour contract (a couple of hours per week) with the other bookkeeping work for the same client going through our practice as usual.

Does this work in terms of minimising risk all round?

Any likely issues with AAT (generally in line with ICAEW regs).

 

Replies (9)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Paul Crowley
09th Sep 2020 21:42

Employee best solution.
But I would look to keep all together and figure out a pricing that fits

Thanks (1)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
avatar
By CWservices6064
09th Sep 2020 22:09

Is there any particular reason for not isolating this single function as a PAYE role and continuing with the rest of the work on an outsourced basis?

Thanks (0)
Replying to CWservices6064:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
09th Sep 2020 22:19

My opinion only
but things will overlap.
Assuming that bookkeeping only not an accountants role

ICAEW consider that accountants role is to be independent of client so cannot be both employee and independent accountant. Similarly cannot be investor

In what role will be any possible error?
PII may choose to decide any error you make was as an employee

Thanks (0)
Hitch photo
By Kevin Kavanagh
10th Sep 2020 09:20

I have to agree with CW and Paul. If you really want to carry on it would be advisable to go as an employee for all your duties for that particular client.

But I still don't really understand why it's so difficult for the client to make their own payments.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Kevkava:
avatar
By CWservices6064
10th Sep 2020 13:20

I agree entirely with your last line!

One of the directors simply does not want in house staff knowing about the finances which I can understand.

That leaves just the two directors who are always very busy.............this has to be worth some of their time though.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Kevkava:
avatar
By CWservices6064
10th Sep 2020 13:20

I agree entirely with your last line!

One of the directors simply does not want in house staff knowing about the finances which I can understand.

That leaves just the two directors who are always very busy.............this has to be worth some of their time though.

Thanks (0)
.
By Cheshire
10th Sep 2020 09:44

I am interested in the why you are so desperate to accede to this clients request?

Do you think you will lose the whole gig if you decline? Are you try ing to be too accomodating?

If you really still want to go down this road I see you have 2 choices:
- go elsewhere for you PII. Although I suspect you still will find an issue getting cover (which is why I mentioned it on your other post)
- go employed for the whole gig. I agree with the others, you cannot separate the payment part of the role from the bookkeeping. Client can, its his business. But you cannot do the payments with the knowledge gained from the bookkeeping. Insurance claim in the waiting, but with no cover. Worth it?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Cheshire:
avatar
By CWservices6064
10th Sep 2020 13:28

I guess it's a bit of both. Hopefully now I've explained the PI position to them they will see it's not just a case of me being awkward which appears to be their impression.

I suppose that their insurance would not cover a bank payment error where a 1/3 party (albeit on the mandate) pressed go (whatever the audit trail of evidenced directors authority) and mine doesn't so it could be very painful.

It will be another client referring to me a 'cautious Col'!!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By johnt27
10th Sep 2020 20:18

I still don't see why you can't use either an approval process or an app to initiate the payments, subject to the client's approval. That should accommodate both your PII and take most of the admin away from the client, which they seem so desperate to avoid...

Thanks (0)
Share this content