Do you offer collect and drop facility?

Do you offer collect and drop facility?

Didn't find your answer?

EDIT

This is a basic question, do not read/respond  if you do not like basic questions. If you do respond please be courteous or move on. Do not waste your time and mine by clogging up this thread.

Apart from one client taken on in my early days, I do not offer to collect client documents and then dropping them once the work is done. It would be too time intensive.

I had a potential client meeting and he said that another accountant offers this. I did explain to him this would add to the cost since more time would be taken up on him.

I informed  the client I would like to think about this and I would let him know on Monday.  It was obvious that this point would be a deal breaker for the client. In terms of time it would take about an hour every quarter to do this.This adds up when this are many clients.

I remember TaxAssist accountants offering this.

How do you get  records from your clients?

NB I am not asking for advice what I should do. I am asking what the practice is

Replies (138)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

By Owain_Glyndwr
13th Sep 2011 18:28

Comment moderated

[Removed - severely off topic.]

Thanks (0)
Replying to Wilston:
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 18:38

Moderated comment

[Removed - in response to above moderated comment.]

Thanks (1)
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 18:31

Different

 

You said: “what is the point of entering a race if you don't intend to win?”

But now you say something different:

“I didn't say you shouldn't enter a race you can't win - but the aim has to be to finish as high as possible, and, more importantly, to improve your skill, speed etcetera so that after a few races you ARE challenging for the win.”

Your second statement contradicts the first.

Anyway, I still disagree with your second statement. Plenty of people can get a lot of pleasure out of playing football, tennis, chess, the guitar and numerous other activities without giving up unless they are “challenging for the win”.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 18:34

Winning

I didn't say you shouldn't enter a race you can't win - but the aim has to be to finish as high as possible, and, more importantly, to improve your skill, speed etcetera so that after a few races you ARE challenging for the win.

Why?! Can't you do anything without having to beat someone? It's not all about winning, and it is about taking part. I can't help thinking that you're the one who's losing because of your mindset.

But as you'll probably have to 'win' this discussion I'll stand back and let you race ahead... Enjoy your rushed victories & I'll enjoy my slow-paced journey through life. (Though if you get to your funeral first I think I might be the one celebrating a victory!)

 

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 18:34

What????

I've totally lost the plot here! 

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 18:57

Comment moderated

[Removed - offensive content.]

Thanks (1)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 19:04

Moderated comment

[Removed - off topic.]

Thanks (2)
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 19:04

Comment moderated

[Removed - off topic, unacceptable content.]

Thanks (2)
Replying to justsotax:
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 19:28

Comment moderated

[Removed - continuation of above moderated discussion topic.]

Thanks (2)
Replying to deg2yq:
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 20:01

Moderated comment

[Removed - continuation of above moderated discussion topic.]

Thanks (0)
Replying to Flying Scotsman:
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 20:20

Moderated comment

[Removed - continuation of above moderated discussion topic.]

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 19:09

Comment moderated

[Removed - continuation of above moderated discussion topic.]

Thanks (1)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 19:10

Clarification

"what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?"

I guess what was really meant by that was "what is the point in having a business if you don't intend to be successful?"

Which is quite different. I don't think many would disagree with the revised version. The only debatable point being the measurement of success - some will use personal wealth, others will use enjoyment and others still may measure it by the wealth/happiness of their clients (and of course all three, and other criteria, can overlap to lesser or greater degrees).

So, starting from scratch, it is logical to assume that there has to be some degree of expansion before one can declare their business to have been a success. But that does not mean that the business has to continue to expand indefinitely - which was the inference that I drew, rightly or wrongly, from the original comment. As far as I'm concerned, my business has expanded as far as I need/want it to - to Australia.

Thanks (2)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 19:21

You're not very ambitious BKD

..... why stop at Australia, why not expand to the moon?

... but then again ... you won't find many clients on the moon ;)

Ok - back on topic (2nd topic?) - success means something different to each of us, and I personally think that is a very good thing, otherwise we would all be chasing the same dream.

Thanks (1)
By Owain_Glyndwr
13th Sep 2011 19:22

OK - let me try again to get my point over.

 

Surely whether we are talking about sport, or about games (like chess), or about running a business (whether a professional practice or a left handed screwdriver manufacturer), the object and aim must always to do better tomorrow than you do today.

The only alternative to constant improvement is stagnation. Like it or not we live in a competative society where the weak are trampled and the strongest survive.

If you dont grow and others do, the only outcome will be that you are squeezed out of business, or at best end up feeding on the scraps the others dont want.

For too long we have had this silly politically correct rubbish in schools where kids are not allowed to lose as it "might traumatise them", which of course, is total rubbish. What we actually do is turn out kids who are not equiped to deal with real life.

It doesnt matter what aspect of life you look at, there are winners and losers, and anyone lacking that competative instinct will end up a loser.

 

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to deg2yq:
avatar
By User deleted
14th Sep 2011 09:03

In the words of Gershwin ...

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:

Surely whether we are talking about sport, or about games (like chess), or about running a business (whether a professional practice or a left handed screwdriver manufacturer), the object and aim must always to do better tomorrow than you do today.

... it ain't necessarily so!

Although probably is more so these days and more is the pity. Many a craftsman plies his trade for love of what he does, restoring furniture, mending clocks, etc. he may be sucessful but that is likely through no conscious effort on his part, but because he is damn good at what he does and word spreads. There is a good chance he is, in the opinion of many, seriously under-pricing himself - but he is happy. 

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:
 

For too long we have had this silly politically correct rubbish in schools where kids are not allowed to lose as it "might traumatise them", which of course, is total rubbish. What we actually do is turn out kids who are not equiped to deal with real life.

I agree with this in part, sport is and should be competitive and it is actually extremely discriminatory to make it not so, as for many they are being denied the chance to excel at their gift, whilst there is no such "taboo" on the more academically endowed.

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:
 

It doesnt matter what aspect of life you look at, there are winners and losers, and anyone lacking that competative instinct will end up a loser. 

So academics, researchers and historians are all losers because they do things for the pure love and interest of the subject. Loser is a very powerful word and also very subjective in many cases. Obviously in sporting events it is clear cut, but when you are talking about how people live their lives you are marking purely by personal standards.

I strive to do my best every day, some I succeed, others I don't.

 

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 19:36

No ... never ....

I have listened and I doubt I will ever understand you.

I always wondered why some schools won't promote competition ... but maybe I am now beginning to understand!

It isn't about winners and losers .. it is about helping each other and living in harmony. Peace is better than war. The best route is to avoid conflict, and that means being tolerant of other peoples views, religion, or whatever.

If the strong trample the weak do we do something about it ... or do we join in? 

 

Thanks (1)
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 19:55

Winners and losers - too simplistic?

 

“The only alternative to constant improvement is stagnation.”

I don’t think anybody is saying we don’t think we are improving. For example, Shirley may not be looking for more clients but that doesn’t mean she won’t improve her pricing tool.

“If you dont grow and others do, the only outcome will be that you are squeezed out of business, or at best end up feeding on the scraps the others dont want.”

Why? My clients don’t seem to be rushing to other accountants who are expanding.

“For too long we have had this silly politically correct rubbish in schools where kids are not allowed to lose as it "might traumatise them", which of course, is total rubbish. What we actually do is turn out kids who are not equiped to deal with real life.”

I wondered how long it would be before you brought this up. Nobody here has said any such thing. Your attitude would result in even more badly equipped children because they would be refusing to take part if they didn’t intend to win or if they didn’t expect to be challenging for first. Not everybody has the potential to be first. Some people may not be strong enough or will never have sufficient skill. Children need encouragement to improve and not focus on trying to be the best all the time.

“It doesnt matter what aspect of life you look at, there are winners and losers, and anyone lacking that competative instinct will end up a loser.”

Instilling a “competitive instinct” in people wont make most of them winners. In fact the majority will still be losers (at least by your definition).

Thanks (0)
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 20:05

Sometime it is just talk

Shirley

I wouldn't take too much notice of what some people say.

There are situations when you should try to win. One example is sport but just because you don't think you can win that is no reason to not try or to refuse to even take part. You can be 99% certain that you will never be as good as your opponent but I still think you should try your best. Ignore OGs comments about not taking part if you don't intend to win. He is simply trying to make out he is a "winner".

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 20:22

Comment moderated

[Removed - continuation of above moderated discussion topic.]

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 20:24

Peter - I understand what you are saying

... and I am in full agreement.

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 21:21

The weak get trampled? Kill or be killed?

The only alternative to constant improvement is stagnation. Like it or not we live in a competative society where the weak are trampled and the strongest survive.

(and from another thread)

But, I guarantee that when put in a position of kill or be killed your natural instinct would come to the fore and you would kill in order to survive. 

We live in the UK, not some tribal village in a remote area where they eat each other. Why make references to survival and killing? We live in a civilised society, and both references were totally irrelevant to the topics under discussion.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 21:31

I agree Shirley ...

... but, many remote tribal villages are, imho, far more "civilised" than we are, especially in terms of respect and treatment of their elders.

I don't know who watched this series, but the tribe involved lived together, worked together and ate together. When a couple got married the village would help build them a house. Any problems were discussed and resolved amicably by the village, i was quite envious of their lifestyle, free of the jealousies and competitiveness of life in the UK.

This is an extract from the link below:

"One of the problems of our modern world is that for too long we've regarded these cultures as a sort of exotic creature, thinking how primitive they are," says the Sydney-based anthropologist Kirk Huffman, who acted as a consultant to the project. "But I've spent 18 years living with them, and there's a lot we can learn. They are much more open-minded, and interested in the big questions. In the West, we are obsessed by little things. Our culture is all about how: to travel faster, to live longer, and make more money. Smart cultures are more about why. They are more reflective. That's what they can teach us."

And that, really, is what science should be all about. It should inform us about ourselves, for we have much to learn from so-called primitive societies. In their strange journey towards Buckingham Palace, and the adulation with which they revere Prince Philip in all his forms, Yapa, Joel, JJ, Posen and Albi have actually given us a glimpse of what we lost. 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/strange-island-pacific-tribesmen-come-to-study-britain-401461.html 

 

Thanks (1)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 21:58

An interesting article OGA

In many ways they are the lucky ones.

 

In 2006, the New Economics Foundation and Friends of the Earth rated Vanuatu as the happiest place to live of all the world's 178 nations using the Happy Planet Index, which reflects the average years of happy life produced by a given society, nation or group of nations, per unit of planetary resources consumed

I wonder where the UK came in the ratings?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 22:21

Ask and it will be given ...

... 108

http://www.happyplanetindex.org/public-data/files/happy-planet-index-2-0.pdf

We were 74 in the second report, but that only measured 148 nations.

http://www.happyplanetindex.org/public-data/files/happy-planet-index-2-0.pdf

 

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
By Owain_Glyndwr
13th Sep 2011 23:01

Moderated comment

[Removed - confrontational content directed at individual members.]

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
14th Sep 2011 07:15

@OGA

Thanks for the links to the reports :)

They look very interesting and maybe I can learn something from them. I will read them tonight.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
14th Sep 2011 08:09

Moderated comment

[Removed - directed attack.]

Thanks (3)
By Owain_Glyndwr
14th Sep 2011 08:34

Comment moderated

[Removed - continuation of above moderated discussion topic & confrontational content.]

Thanks (0)
Quack
By Constantly Confused
14th Sep 2011 08:51

Wut?

What is going on in this topic?!?  Please play nice everyone and remember, everytime you argue on AW a duck dies...

Thanks (1)
avatar
By User deleted
14th Sep 2011 09:09

Moderated comment

[Removed - discussion of banned members, confrontational content.]

Thanks (1)
avatar
By User deleted
14th Sep 2011 09:24

Moderated comment

[Removed - continuation of above moderated discussion topic.]

 

Thanks (1)
By Owain_Glyndwr
14th Sep 2011 09:40

Moderated comment

[Removed - discussion of banned members, confrontational content.]

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
14th Sep 2011 09:45

For some people ...

... even going on holiday is a competition

They have to compare landmarks and monuments visited, have to have gone further and spent more, done the most, seen the most and be worried if they hadn't ticked all the boxes in their eye-spy book!

 

Thanks (2)
By ShirleyM
14th Sep 2011 10:07

Selective competition

I think many of us enjoy a little skirmish and a bit of competition ... so long as it doesn't get out of hand, but to me, 'winning' cannot be applied to everything you do.

We all have our talents, and some things we are not so good at. I am pretty good at lots of things, but I wouldn't say I am a master of anything.

I prefer to have lots of interests. To be really really good (the best?) you have to dedicate your life to it, otherwise you are no different to anyone else who is just 'having a go' for the fun of it. 

Who can afford to dedicate their life to being the 'best' at everything, and still have a life to live?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
14th Sep 2011 13:06

I am beginning to think ...

... I have psychic tendancies, that is twice today! 

EDIT: Oh dear, this doesn't make sense now and I was enjoying this thread too - :o)

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Henry Osadzinski
14th Sep 2011 11:33

Moderator Notice

I'm taking this thread down to clean up the amount of off-topic discussion and questionable content that has been posted.

Members found to be in violation of the community rules will be contacted privately.

Please be mindful of the rules when posting and check them here if you are ever unsure.

Edit: Done - see comment below for further details.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Henry Osadzinski
14th Sep 2011 12:47

Notice - Thread Moderated

As is clear from the number of moderated posts (and more that have simply been removed), this thread has gone severely off-topic. I have had to remove a large amount of offensive, inciting and confrontational content, all of which was in violation of the AccountingWEB community rules. Authors of this content will be contacted and provided with greater detail of the infractions.

Unless your comment pertains to the original question that was posted, consider this thread to be closed. Any further off-topic discussion will be removed. Please remember to use the Time Out section or start a separate question thread when you feel your comment is not relevant to the starting post.

 

 

Thanks (0)

Pages