INTERIM ORDERS COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS

Transcription

1 INTERIM ORDERS COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS In the matter of: Ms Wendy Aita-Tagle Heard on: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 Location: International Dispute Resolution Centre, 70 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1EU Committee: Mr Michael Cann (Chairman), Mr Robert Clarke (Accountant) and Mr Joseph Comyn (Lay) Legal Adviser: Ms Lucia Whittle-Martin Persons present and capacity: Mr Mohammed Ismail (ACCA Case Presenter) Ms Sophie Cubillo-Barsi (Hearings Officer) Observers: None 1. The hearing convened to consider the imposition of an Interim Order in respect of Ms Aita-Tagle suspending her membership pursuant to Regulations 3(1) and 8(1)(a) of The Chartered Certified Accountants Interim Order Regulations 2014 as amended on 1 January 2016 ( the Regulations ) 2. The Committee had before it a bundle consisting of pages 1-6, A Q and 1-188, a tabled additional bundle numbered and a service bundle consisting of 1-10 pages. SERVICE OF PAPERS 3. In light of the information available the Committee was satisfied that Ms Aita-Tagle had been served with Notice in accordance with the requirements of the relevant Regulations. Notice of the hearing had been sent to Ms Aita-Tagle at her registered

2 address on 8 November 2016, which was within 14 days of the date of hearing, and contained the information required by Regulation 5 of the Regulations. PROCEEDING IN ABSENCE 4. Mr Ismail applied to proceed in the absence of Ms Aita-Tagle. The Committee had sight of an dated 18 November 2016 in which ACCA asked Ms Aita-Tagle to confirm whether she would be attending the Interim Order hearing. She replied in an dated 21 November 2016: I can confirm that I am happy for it to go ahead in my absence. 5. The Committee concluded that Ms Aita-Tagle had been aware of the hearing and had chosen not to attend. She had not made an application to adjourn and the Committee concluded that it was unlikely that she would attend if the matter were to be adjourned. The Committee decided that it was in the public interest for the matter to be heard expeditiously and that it would be right to proceed in the absence of Ms Aita-Tagle. BACKGROUND 6. The Committee heard that a disciplinary hearing is due to be heard in which Ms Aita- Tagle faces the following allegations: It is alleged at Wendy Aita-Tagle, ACCA Fellow and, at the relevant time, sole principal of Tagle & Co: 1. Failed to retain the audit working papers as referred to in Schedule 1 for seven years, in breach of paragraph 5, Section B6 of the Code of Ethics and Conduct 2. On or about 1 October 2015 arranged for the financial statements for Company A for the year ended 31 December 2014 to be filed with the Companies Registration Office without a signed audit report, in breach of the Fundamental Principle of Integrity

3 3. On or about 1 October 2015 arranged for the financial statements for Company B for the year ended 31 December 2014 to be filed with the Companies Registration Office without a signed audit report, in breach of the Fundamental Principle of Integrity 4. In light of any or all of the facts set out at Allegation 1 Wendy Aita-Tagle is (i) Guilty of misconduct pursuant to bye-law 8 (a) (i) Or (ii) Liable to disciplinary action pursuant to bye-law 8 (a) (iii) 5. In light of any or all of the facts set out at Allegations 2 and /or 3 Wendy Aita- Tagle is guilty of misconduct. 7. The allegations arise from a routine monitoring visit conducted on 25 November 2015 at the premises of Ms Aita-Tagle s sole practice Tagle & Co. At that time Ms Aita- Tagle was authorized to carry on audit work, having been issued with a Practising Certificate and audit qualification on 14 November Ms Aita-Tagle does not currently hold a Practising Certificate, having decided not to apply for a renewal at the end of December In relation to Allegation 1 ACCA allege that in the course of the monitoring visit Ms Aita-Tagle provided the ACCA Senior Compliance Officer with a list of 16 audit clients and admitted that she had not retained audit papers relating to 13 of those clients. She explained that the files had been stored in her father s shed and that he had later thrown them out. The Committee had sight of an sent by Ms Aita- Tagle to ACCA in which she allegedly confirmed the account that she provided to the Compliance Officer. The Committee also had sight of a letter dated 24 March 2016 in which Ms Aita-Tagle allegedly stated that she had placed the files in her father s outhouse in March/April 2014, and that she first realized that the files had been lost in October 2015 when she started gathering records in readiness for the monitoring visit. It was alleged that she had not notified the clients, or her professional indemnity insurers, nor had she sought any advice with regard to any data protection issues. 9. Mr Ismail drew the Committee s attention to Paragraph 4, Section B6 of the Code of Ethics and Conduct, indicating that Ms Aita-Tagle had been under an obligation to retain the audit working papers for a minimum of seven years. Mr Ismail submitted

4 that of the 13 missing audit reports, the earliest audit report was signed off by her on 26 March 2013, and the most recent on 23 June In relation to Allegation 2 and Allegation 3 Mr Ismail relied upon the evidence of the Compliance Officer who reported that during the monitoring visit Ms Aita-Tagle admitted that she had not completed the audit for either Company A or Company B but had nevertheless arranged for the annual returns, together with the unsigned accounts, to be filed with the Companies Registration Office. 11. The Committee was taken to an allegedly sent by Ms Aita-Tagle to the Compliance Officer dated 11 December 2015 in which she stated: Both companies required an audit due to late filing. I filed both B1 s electronically on the 3 rd of September 2015, giving until 1 st October to submit the accounts to CRO. I still had not received all of my audit evidence by the 1 st October and I was out of the country for the three days up until 2 nd October. I called the office and asked for the set of the accounts as they were on the system to be printed and sent to CRO. I didn t think they would accept them, as I had not signed them, the idea being that they would send them back to me, and so giving me an additional 14 days to finalise the audit without incurring further costs to the client. For reasons unkown [sic] the CRO accepted the accounts as they were, and the accounts showing on CRO are incorrect. I am in the process of finalising the audits and replacing the accounts showing in CRO with the correct audited accounts 12. It was alleged that despite asserting in her of 11 December 2015 that she was finalising the audits and replacing the accounts showing in CRO with the correct audited accounts, Ms Aita-Tagle informed the Compliance officer a month later, on 7 January 2016, that she had not in fact completed the audit work. By that date she no longer held her practising certificate and was no longer in a position to complete the audit work. 13. It was submitted on behalf of ACCA that Ms Aita-Tagle had submitted two sets of financial statements which contained materially false or misleading statements and that she had taken no steps to complete the audit work or check whether the Companies Registration Office had rejected the financial statements. It was submitted that this resulted in misleading or false financial statements being filed on the public register.

5 14. Mr Ismail submitted that an interim order was necessary for the protection of the public on the basis that Ms Aita-Tagle had not demonstrated insight into her past behaviour and would present a risk to the public were she to return to work as an ACCA member unrestricted. DECISION 15. The Committee was aware that its role was not to make findings of fact but to assess whether, on the basis of all the material before it, an order was necessary for the protection of the public. 16. The Committee noted an dated 21 November 2016 from Ms Aita-Tagle to ACCA in which she expressed her understanding that her membership had lapsed by virtue of the fact that she had not renewed her membership nor had she renewed any certificates she previously held. The Committee also took into account an dated18 March 2016 headed Notice of potential removal from the ACCA register in which Ms Aita-Tagle was advised by ACCA that if payment for renewal of her membership was not made by 15 April 2016 she would be removed from the ACCA register. The Committee understood that no such payment had been forthcoming. The Committee understood that the relevant records indicated that Ms Aita-Tagle s membership was still valid. However, the Committee bore in mind the possibility that Ms Aita-Tagle regarded herself as unable to practise. The Committee took into account the fact that she had given a clear indication within the papers that she was now in partnership with my husband farming and also do some private catering and had no current desire to return to work as an accountant. The Committee also took into account the fact that ACCA had been aware of the alleged misconduct since March 2016 and there was no suggestion that Ms Aita-Tagle had held herself out as an accountant since then. 17. The Committee concluded that the risk that Ms Aita-Tagle would hold herself out as an ACCA member was low and that even if she were to try to do so a member of the public would see from the records that she did not hold a practising certificate. 18. In all the circumstances the Committee concluded that the risk to the public if no immediate interim order was imposed was low. 19. Accordingly, the Committee refused the application to impose an interim order.

6 COSTS AND REASONS 20. Mr Ismail did not make an application for costs in light of the decision. Mr Michael Cann Chairman 23 November 2016