Member Since: 21st May 2002
28th May 2020
I don't have knowledge of the rules on any of this - but I like the way you think.
14th May 2020
Completely irrelevant to the question being asked but it brings to mind my favourite case of employee overpayment.
I worked in a firm where we did the executive payroll for a large retail business. Paid 4-weekly. Client employee got a pay increase. My colleague inadvertently divided the increase by 12 instead of 13 which led to the employee getting more than he should have got for a couple of months.
When it was discovered (not, of course, by the employee), the employee reportedly went bananas and rejected absolutely the notion that he might return the overpayment to his employer. He even resisted the pay reduction to the correct figure (although the company overruled that). My conscientious colleague was distraught and my employer ended up footing the bill.
Several years later, having moved to another job, imagine my schadenfreude when I opened the newspaper to find that the employee had pleaded guilty to carrying out a fraud (unrelated to the overpayment) on the employer and had received a four year jail sentence.
Apologies for going off-topic.
6th Mar 2020
Sorry, unfortunately, I am unable to answer any of your questions. I haven't tried Firefox, nor have I used the approvals process. Still, don't shoot it down yet. They say that they are close to full compatibility with Chrome and, to be honest, I am able to live with the IE inconvenience.
5th Mar 2020
I'm a long-term AccountsIQ user, although our volumes are fairly small and we don't use all of the functionality. It handles all of your specified requirements quite well. They have improved steadily over the years.
No significant initial outlay and a modest monthly cost. It's definitely worth a look. I don't know enough about the alternatives to say that AIQ is better than any of them.
There are some minor irritations with AIQ: it is not yet fully compatible with Chrome and works best on Internet Explorer; I don't think it works easily with Mac; I don't like the way it handles prepayments.
You may find that AIQ will give you almost all of what you need and the best value for money and it is worth a look.
12th Feb 2020
I will be fascinated to see the answers. Good start from spidersong. It would be interesting to hear from anyone with direct knowledge of treatment of similar cases.
7th Feb 2020
Some organisations have a rigorous file weeding schedule and process - and it is not necessarily a good or bad thing.
There was one famous example in Ireland some years ago. A State tribunal (in Ireland) investigating corruption in the planning process heard from a star witness that a politician had asked for a payment to be made to a bank account in Australia. The politician had given him a sheet of headed paper from the bank with account details on it. He had retained that and had sent a large payment to it.
The politician died before the matter came to light but his family claimed for a long time that he was honest and did not have any such account. The tribunal made contact with the bank and the bank was only able to state that there had been an account with that number in the man's name but that it had been closed some years before - and that all transaction records relating to it had been shredded seven years later. Thus the trail went cold as it was not possible to say how much money had gone into it or what had happened to the money when it left the account. No further work required by the bank.
23rd Jan 2020
I suspect that the anomaly here is partially caused by the number of week days in January 2020 - 23 days, including the bank holiday.
The standard month's pay would be annual salary / 12 which would be the equivalent of 260 working days / 12 = 20.67.
Therefore if you pay someone for actual days worked from starting date or up to leaving date, it is possible that they could get more than a month's pay.
15th Nov 2019
I came across this quote recently and it resonated with me in relation to numerous events in the past. It guides me well now.
“If a person is being insensitive to you, you don’t have a commitment to be beholden to their insensitivity.”
11th Nov 2019
Different jurisdiction but similar. Our institute felt exposed due to the firm holding client funds (typically for payroll and taxes). However, we regularly had large amounts passing through. Institute regulations required us to reconcile the account frequently and have tight controls - all of which led to a significant workload. The institute also sent someone nearly every year to ensure that we were complying with the rules. We charged for the facility. If you say no, what are the alternatives?
My first inclination would be to try to get someone else to do it. If you want to facilitate the client, check with the ACCA. You should also make sure that the bank regards the account as client money and not your firm's and that you have their acknowledgement of that fact. Getting this in writing tended to be difficult with some banks.
24th Oct 2019
I'm not sure that the other answers are correct.
The VAT of £11.66 is exactly 20% of the net amount £58.32.
The rate of VAT in Ireland is 23% so LinkedIn are not charging Irish VAT.
Check the VAT number that is shown on their invoice. If it is a UK number, I would claim the VAT on your UK return, even if it is addressed to the individual - the amount is small.