You might also be interested in
Replies (10)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
What a joke of a criminal justice system we have that this drink driver only got 3 years and will probably be out in half that!
https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/top-judge-jailing-d...
[Edit] See also this similar case:
https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/tragic-bikers-family-put-an...
On the other hand if you are an environmental protester you get 16 months for sitting on a lorry for a couple of days, in full knowledge of the police who basically stood there and watched them!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/26/anti-fracking-activi...
I do wonder about these Institutes at times - and whether I want to be associated with the people they permit to be members - and who they allow to be senior figures within them. Wasnt't long ago ATT's leader was in serious trouble, for example.
I mean, what a selfish and irresponsible thing to get into a car when THAT drunk. Bordlerline I get - but not actually legless. Then drive off leaving the poor guy for dead for all he cared. Then denies it. Then crys "poor me" at Tribunal.
Personally, I'd like there to be a line of people waiting to give his entitled behind a good whooping when he gets out. Not that he will learn from it. Just cry some more "poor me".
I do wonder what I am paying so much money a year for and about the quality of the people whose brush I am tarnished with, I really do.
For once AnnAccountant's self-righteousness is actually justified! I agree that these scandals happen far too regularly. The CIoT was pretty embarrassed recently with this one:
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/former-ciot-president-admits-child-[***]...
I would like to know from AnnAccountant and Justin Bryant how exactly they would expect the ICAEW and CIOT to police membership in such a way that they can weed out drunk drivers and other serious offenders before they have actually offended or their offences have become known.
Once the members offences were known, they were excluded, which, as the commentary states, is the only reasonable thing to do. But before then, I find it hard to imagine by what process members can be judged to be likely to offend. Perhaps some detailed questionnaire on members drinking habits, sexual predilections or other potentially criminal inclinations. I think not; imagine the outcry. You need to be realistic.
Sadly all walks of life have bad boys and bad girls including premeditated murderers as well as those irresponsible enough to drink and drive or carry out other serious offences. But identifying them when there is no evidence of potential or actual wrong doings is a tricky thing to do and castigating the professional bodies for failing to do so is quite ridiculous and grossly unfair.
I disagree. Anyone put in a senior position of high importance and responsibility, should they be senior bankers, supreme court judges or even ATT and CIoT presidents, should be properly vetted (references, background checks, personality checks and all the rest of it). This happens already for lots of jobs dealing with children, applications for firearms licences etc. , so it's not rocket science to apply that elsewhere as above (people who seek such top jobs tend to be dangerously power mad, psychotic, narcissistic, egotistical etc. in the 1st place (I've met enough of them, trust me), hence the need for such checks in the 1st place).
Such checks would also stop people like Trump getting into power (wishful thinking I know).
This is just bizzare.
Did I read correctly ?
In house accountant indulges in futile window dressing which leads to no benefit; gets struck off with £16k fine.
FCA guy mows down child whilst completly drunk at the wheel and get jailed. Institute think that it deserves full disciplinary hearing to discuss pros and cons, etc. Then a measly fine of £2,500 and a suggestion that really it was not the guy's fault. His friends should have stopped him. Not his fault it seems. Do I detect sympathy because the guy is FCA and ex Council member ?
I do not agree with little the £2,500 fine, and the whole case stinks. It's hard to think a worse case scenario to bring the profession in disrepute. His colleges should also take responsibility and be called in to be disciplined. Where is this fine money going? Has anyone contacted the family of the 16-year old who's life has been destroyed? What is the institute doing to compensate the injured party? Surely they have the decency to support this family overcome this?
Must admit I read it as he got off with no fine at all, that was just costs (and those halved) due to being such a jolly spiffing sort of chap who is on the council.
Dark day for the ICAEW to not clobber him.
To drive over the limit strikes of delusions of entitlement
To hit someone and not stop is a incredibly poor judgement
To try and cover it up and repeat the offence by driving 100+ miles to hide is simply unforgivable.
At the very least having got to the ex-wifes you calm down, get a taxi back to the scene of the cime and face the music having made the initial two poor decisions.
Its just a lack of basic integrity.
You can do all manner of dodgy bank audits for billions of pounds. Audits which at least partly led to the financial crash, by misrepresenting the true state of health of 300 or more European banks which had clean audit reports but needed big bailouts.
You can also do well dodgy clean audits of companies like Carillion and Globo, which go bust just months later with huge black holes suddenly in their accounts.
You can have your fingerprints all over the worst tax scams, such as the Panama papers and similar recent public scandals.
But as long as your letterhead says you are in the Big 6 you stand no chance of any sort of disciplinary, let alone actually being booted out.
Misrepresent a £50k directors loan and you get massive hobnailed boots up the backside. Don't get me wrong that is fair enough in my view.
So all the well dodgy Big 6 guys should also get the boot, then, to be consistent.
That would transform auditing from a chocolate fireguard into something resembling a decent probe, and reduce the deficits of most of the G20 by increasing tax revenues.
Then we'd be getting somewhere.