You might also be interested in
Replies (34)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
shame on him but £12k costs sought thats almost equally outrageous , they should have had it wrapped up in 10 mins, will we never be rid of jobsworths ;-)
So are we now in the position that there is a breach whenever ACCA members post any questions or anecdotes that concern unidentified clients? Does this spell the end of AWEB Any Answers, or Readers Forum in Taxation magazine etc?
LOL Jon, i think the reported case was in a different class to this and was thoroughly objectionable so hopefully you loyal remaining members will be able to rest easy over Christmas
Well, if the professional bodies ever visit Accounting Web they will have a field day, there are enough latent fines on these pages for all the employees of ICAS, ICAEW and ACCA to go on an all expenses paid fact finding seminar in say Las Vegas.
Not sure if I should report the last post !!!
Whilst deleting all my football forum log ins
I saw the Facebook page of an HMRC officer which included content that was shocking, completely unacceptable, and clearly breached the Civil Service guidelines. Although reported to a senior officer, which resulted in a hasty dismantling of the site, as far as I can see that officer, continues to be employed by the Civil Service as before.
Extract above
'The ACCA committee ordered Mr Baker pay ACCA’s costs in the sum of £9,000.'
Ludicrous, Ludicrous, just for one email, so what happens if I hear anyone saying a racist or homophobic joke (and there are a lot out there) do i have to contact the Police, ACCA or any other regulatory body just in case their members beached a rule. Also i hope any members of the disciplinary committee have never told or laughed at a racist, sexist or homophobic joke.
Isn't it abundantly clear by now the committee have no sense of humor?
And the sheer amount of costs they clock up on these cases is scary!
Shouldn't the costs be independently determined as to whether they should be paid? The committee deciding how much and whether they should be paid doesn't seem right.
Now I have this client and......
Thats all you get
But it was funny.....
I wish I could share....
Thought police took over the public sector years ago. Now it seems that the accountancy profession has fallen to them. Would be laughable if it wasn't so frightening.
People posting voluntary advice here need to be more concerned about para 13 et seq in the link below I think:
Yes, but I am now going to start appending the following to all my posts;
"This poster has been known to talk complete and utter boll** , especially when pi**ed. As you have no idea whether I am currently pi**ed or not (and time of day is no indicator) you ought not to rely upon any comments I have made in this post (except this one of course) and instead ought to seek paid for professional advice from an accountant who you at least have a slim chance of estimating is not currently pi**ed"
That ought to cover me.
I think its fair to say though that whilst skilled/non-skilled & qualified/non-qualified individuals can quote or pas on their knowledge, advice or experiences, the more savvy will temper that information or their comments with something along the lines of '..you're on your own..' if the party reading or using it chooses to act on it..??
Oh dear. I wonder what would happen if they decided to take that line with Accounting Web updates. I have to say most people on here are certainly not backward when it comes to airing their views. I always go with, if you wouldn't say it to their face, don't say it at all.
I salute you with profound respect for your upstandingness. You are a fiscal agent of true decency
Oh dear. I wonder what would happen if they decided to take that line with Accounting Web updates. I have to say most people on here are certainly not backward when it comes to airing their views. I always go with, if you wouldn't say it to their face, don't say it at all.
Aside from the fact that it was an ACCA member and the fine was massive, this is the usual political correctness, with a bite.
Minority rule rather than majority rule.
Sometimes there are things that shock us and go against our belief but we are suppose to accept everything with a smile. For example, key figures in the church have suggested that boys should be allowed to wear skirts at school but we are not allowed to make a negative comment about that suggestion and must all say "yes, good idea".
All this reminds me of the "Emperor's new clothes" tale. We just go along with everything in order not to look stupid or different or politically incorrect.
Having seen every Dr Who series since inception, I think I can safely say that the current series is the worst, despite the fact that 'everyone' seems to say that it is fantastic.
Fantastic it is not.
Devoid of any real imagination, with dull characters and tired storylines. The whole thing is oozing political correctness to the extent that the format has been destroyed and we have ended up with a just distant memory of the brilliant adventures we used to enjoy.
The two points of correlation with this thread are the seeming universal praise showered on this series (The Emperor's New Clothes) and the life draining effect that Political Correctness has as it seeps its way relentlessly into our culture.
In Sunday's episode, it is disappointing to see that there was a genuinely blind actress in the plot who had a part that portrayed her as a blind almost helpless character. It matters not to me that she is blind and with some flair and imagination she could have been cast as a Starship Captain, the Ruler of some distant Galaxy or any number of exciting roles. Instead, political Correctness meant that she was denied this opportunity and used only to exploit her disability as a lesson to us all.
Truly depressing.
If you view it as a hilarious parody of Doctor Who (as opposed to the proper Doctor Who that would go out on a Saturday) you'll enjoy it more.
I've got a bet on that they visit Harvey Milk at some point. Then I've got a full house on PC bingo.
Presumably before he got shot, I wonder does your comment qualify as homophobic? Of course it isn't but you never can tell these days as snowflakes abound. We all need to be a little more robust especially Vegans, I blame MrSpock
I'm trying to recall how Jennifer Saunders described it on last week's News Quiz: something aong the lines of "... our weekly lecture on the dangers of colonialism, racism and misogyny..." (only much, much funnier, because she is, after all, Jennifer Saunders).
It's a real shame - I love Dr Who (always have, since I used to watch with my Dad on Saturday evenings when I was little) but the constant lecturing and moralising are heavy-handed, largely poorly done (and unnecessary).
I like the new ensemble of companions (and the doctor) and they have potential, if only the scripts (and I suspect the budget the beeb is prepared to allocate to a 'female doctor') weren't so dire - it's just that it is supposed to be a sci-fi show - I want alien galaxies and exploding stars, not jaunting around earth's trouble spots to bang home (what should be) infant school concepts...
Damn! I better start posting under a pseudonym so I don't fall foul of the CIOT's rules.
What I do wonder is, if your professional body was to investigate you, and in response you simply resign your membership, what power do they actually have after that?
Is there any precedence for them pursuing the matter through the civil courts in such a case?
Contract lawyer enter stage right.
I suspect it depends what terms you accepted when you joined the Brownies, if you signed up that all liabilities arising as a result of your membership were your liability then possibly yes- start reading the small print (something I can no longer do even with reading glasses)
It makes you wonder if there is a back story as to why the complaint was instigated in the first place.
Maybe a ex client refusing to pay his bill sees pursuing a complaint like that as leverage to avoid paying their bill.
As the accountant will be too tied up with dealing with this that he is unlikely to pursue the matter through the courts.
As I must say if I saw someone making an offensive comment on social media my first thought would not be " I wonder if he is a member of ACCA"
There's a focus on the comment about the potentially identifiable gentleman, but we're missing the point that over 6 years (!) he was posting homophobic, racist and sexist comments. This isn't one slightly misjudged comment/joke. That's unprofessional behaviour over a long period.
This fiscal actor was acting as a whole person and not merely as a fiscal identity. The public forum tends to make people more courageous and less guarded when articulating . Maybe in this instance the fiscal agent was unjudicious and wrong. However, I do feel the accountancy body should not have been involved. This fiscal actor was a mere human being notwithstanding his fiscal neurons and fiscal genes
WE can all make mistakes and have flaws in our personality.
My flaw is I am over fiscally charged
This fiscal actor was acting as a whole person and not merely as a fiscal identity. The public forum tends to make people more courageous and less guarded when articulating . Maybe in this instance the fiscal agent was unjudicious and wrong. However, I do feel the accountancy body should not have been involved. This fiscal was a mere human being notwithstanding his fiscal neurons and fiscal genes
WE can all make mistakes and have flaws in our personality.
My flaw is I am over fiscally charged