Accountancy Age report a rather interesting story about a long running and acrimonious dispute between Mike Pallot (a retired PwC senior partner) and the ICAEW.
Mr Pallot was awarded £1,500 against the institute in a small claims court for overpaid subscriptions. He successfully argued that the ICAEW's subscription notices failed to make it clear that he was due a reduced subscription due to his retirement.
He is quoted:
"The ICAEW certainly seems to have gone to great lengths not to set a precedent by refunding me the amounts I paid as a result of what I see as a clear lack of transparency on its part, although I am at a loss to understand why it didn't seek to settle my claim in a sensible way before the matter reached court."
The case, and the fact that the ICAEW went to so much trouble to try to avoid setting a precedent, gives rise to a number of questions:
1 Why did the ICAEW not simply settle out of court?
2 Why did the ICAEW waste so much time and money on trying to prevent the claim succeeding?
3 How much money did the ICAEW waste by being so intransigent?
4 What is the potential liability facing the ICAEW from back claims made by retired members, and others (eg unemployed), who now realise that they have been overpaying their subscriptions?
5 If the ICAEW knows the answer to 3, why hasn't it done the ethical thing and alerted the members who have overpaid that they are owed a rebate and that they are overpaying their subs?
It seems to me that the ICAEW is running scared, I advise all members to double check their subscriptions.
- Tax Books
- Business Products
- Tax Investigation Insurance
- Contact Me
Originally dedicated to fighting the proposed merger of the ICAEW with CIMA and CIPFA, this site now provides news about the ICAEW
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Posted by Ken Frost at 12:55 PM
Labels: ethics, icaew, subscriptions
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment