DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS

Transcription

1 DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Haroon Dar Heard on: Tuesday, 6 March 2018 Location: Committee: The Adelphi, 1-11 John Adam Street, London WC2N 6AU Mr Ian Ridd (Chairman) Mr Peter Douglas (Accountant) Mr Alastair Papps (Lay) Legal Adviser: Miss Juliet Gibbon Persons present and capacity: Mr Mohammed Ismail (ACCA Case Presenter) Miss Rachael Davies (Hearings Officer) Observers: None Summary: Student removed from ACCA s Student Register and to pay costs to ACCA in the sum of 6, The Disciplinary Committee ( the Committee ) convened to consider allegations made against Mr Haroon Dar. 2. Mr Mohammed Ismail represented ACCA. Mr Dar was not present and not represented. 3. The Committee had a bundle of papers, numbered A-L and 1-95 and a service bundle, numbered 1-14.

2 APPLICATION TO AMEND ALLEGATIONS 4. Mr Ismail made an application to amend some typographical errors in the allegations as drafted. 5. The Committee accepted the advice of the Legal Adviser that in accordance with Regulation 10(5) of the Chartered Certified Accountants Complaints and Disciplinary Regulations 2014, as amended on 1 January 2018, ( the Regulations ), amendments should only be allowed if thereby the relevant person would not be prejudiced in the conduct of his defence. 6. The Committee considered that these were minor amendments required as a result of typographical errors in drafting the allegations. It considered that the amendments did not alter the substance of the allegations against Mr Dar and, had he been present or had he engaged with ACCA, he would not have been prejudiced in the conduct of his defence. 7. The Committee determined Mr Ismail s application to amend the allegations should be allowed. SERVICE 8. Written notice of the hearing, dated 30 January 2018 was sent by recorded post to Mr Dar s address in Pakistan, as shown on ACCA s register. It was also sent by . The Royal Mail track and trace document does not show that the notice was in fact delivered, but under Regulation 22, a notice is deemed delivered within 72 hours of despatch (excluding Saturdays and Sundays). The notice was sent by ACCA on Tuesday 30 January 2018 and would, therefore, have been deemed served on 2 February ACCA has, therefore, given more than the requisite 28 days notice in accordance with Regulation 10(a). 9. The Committee accepted the advice of the Legal Adviser. It was satisfied that ACCA had sent the notice of hearing to Mr Dar at his address on the register in accordance with Regulations 10 and 22 of the Regulations and that service had been effected in accordance with the Regulations.

3 APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN ABSENCE 10. Mr Ismail submitted that Mr Dar had waived his right to be present at the hearing by his failure to engage with ACCA. The notice of hearing had been sent to his address on the register. He reminded the Committee that if Mr Dar had changed address then he was under an obligation to inform ACCA. He submitted that as Mr Dar had completely failed to engage with ACCA s investigation, it was highly unlikely that he would attend on a future date if today s hearing were to be adjourned. Mr Ismail reminded the Committee of the overarching public interest in the expeditious disposal of disciplinary complaints. 11. The Committee considered whether it should proceed in Mr Dar s absence. It accepted the advice of the Legal Adviser. The Committee bore in mind that whilst it had a discretion to conduct proceedings in the absence of the relevant person, it should exercise that discretion with the utmost care and caution. The Committee had regard to the factors set out by Lord Bingham in the case of R v Jones 2002 UKHL 5. It was also referred to the Court of Appeal case of the General Medical Council v Adeogba and Visvardis 2016 EWCA Civ 162, in which Sir Brian Leveson P referred to the responsibility of practitioners to engage with their regulator. 12. The Committee was mindful that there is a public interest in dealing with regulatory matters expeditiously. Given Mr Dar s complete lack of engagement with ACCA, there was no evidence before the Committee to suggest that an adjournment would be likely to result in his attendance on a future occasion. 13. Having balanced the public interest with Mr Dar s interests, the Committee was of the view that Mr Dar had voluntarily absented himself from the hearing. The Committee determined that it was fair, reasonable and in the public interest to proceed in the absence of Mr Dar.

4 ALLEGATIONS (AS AMENDED) 1) Mr Haroon Dar who is registered with ACCA (Association of Chartered Certified Accountants) as a student: a. On 14 May 2017, Mr Dar caused or permitted the submission to ACCA of one or more of the documents listed in Schedule A, which purported to be issued by Anglia Ruskin University when, in fact, they had not. b. Mr Dar s conduct as set out in paragraph 1a) above was: i. Dishonest; ii. Contrary to the Fundamental Principle of Integrity, as applicable in c. Contrary to Paragraph 3(1) of the Complaints and Disciplinary Regulations 2014, Mr Dar has failed to co-operate fully with the investigation of a complaint in that he failed to respond to any or all of ACCA s correspondence as set out in Schedule B. d. By reason of his conduct as set out in 1a) and/or 1b) i and ii and/or 1c), Mr Dar 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). Schedule A 1. Letter dated 11 December 2014 from Anglia Ruskin University confirming his final award as Master of Business Administration; 2. Anglia Ruskin University European Diploma Supplement issued on 7 December Anglia Ruskin University Master of Business Administration certificate dated December 2015.

5 Schedule B June 2017; 2. 7 July 2017; and 3. 9 August BRIEF BACKGROUND 14. According to ACCA s records Mr Dar submitted an online application for registration as a student of ACCA on 14 May He submitted documents, as set out at Schedule A, with his application and these were recorded on ACCA s document storage system, i-doc on 14 May Customers Online is a web-based system used by ACCA to store information relating to all ACCA members and students. That system showed that Mr Dar gained student status (and exemption from ACCA s F1, F2 and F3 examinations based on the documents sent with his application) on 18 May On 25 May 2017 ACCA Exemptions contacted ACCA Investigations to inform them that the documents submitted by Mr Dar as part of his application appeared to be false. 16. Mr 1 of Anglia Ruskin University subsequently considered copies of the documents set out at Schedule A and made a statement in relation to them. He confirmed that there is no record to show that Mr Dar was either a current or former student at Anglia Ruskin University. 17. Mr 1 concluded that document 1 of Schedule A did not appear to be genuine for the following reasons: a. The font was inconsistent, the following words: HAROON DAR, MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, PASS, BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION and December 2015 appeared to have been typed on and were very clear compared to the rest of the certificate; and

6 b. The certificate date of December 2015 appeared to be in double line spacing which was inconsistent with the spacing on the rest of the certificate. 18. Mr 1 concluded that document 2 of Schedule A did not appear to be genuine for the following reasons: a. Haroon Dar s name and the university reference number /2 was in a different font from the rest of the transcript; b. The student reference /2 and the HESA Reference were not recognised numbers and not linked to another student; c. MOD l Stratigic Financial Management contained a spelling mistake. Mr 1 was unable to confirm what module the number MOD referred to; d. The information in the transcript under the headings: level, Mark, Grade, Credits, Attempts ECTS Credits and ECTS Grade, all appeared to tilt from right to left on the page. Mr 1 would have expected them to be in a uniform line; e. The module codes and the corresponding module titles were not familiar to Mr Mr 1 concluded that document 3 of Schedule A did not appear to be genuine for the following reasons: a. Mr Dar s name at the address part of the letter was in capital letters and the font of his name and address appeared darker than the rest of the document; b. The opening salutation is addressed Dear Shahar Banao, not to Mr Dar. The university s system did not recognize the name of Shahar Banao and Mr 1 was, therefore, unable to confirm whether a person by that name was a current or former student.

7 Having considered all the documents, Mr 1 was of the view that the documents set out at Schedule A had not been issued by Anglia Ruskin University and were forgeries. ACCA S SUBMISSIONS 20. Mr Ismail, on behalf of ACCA, submitted that the evidence before the Committee proved that it was more likely than not that Mr Dar had caused or permitted the submission to ACCA of false documents purporting to be issued by Anglian Ruskin University when, in fact, they had not. He submitted that the false documents had been sent with Mr Dar s online application for student registration in an attempt to gain exemption from ACCA examinations. Mr Ismail submitted that the documents were poor quality forgeries and he referred the Committee to the evidence of Mr 1 that they were clearly forgeries. DECISION ON ALLEGATION AND REASONS 21. The Committee noted that Mr Dar had not engaged with ACCA and so it had no response from him to the allegations made by ACCA. ALLEGATIONS 1 a), b) i and ii, c) and d) i Proved 22. The Committee carefully considered the evidence before it and the submissions made by Mr Ismail. The Committee accepted the advice of the Legal Adviser. It bore in mind that the burden of proving a fact in dispute rested with ACCA and that the standard of proof to be applied is the balance of probabilities. 23. In relation to Allegations 1 a) the Committee was satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr Dar had caused or permitted the submission of three false documents to ACCA in an attempt to deceive ACCA into believing that they had been issued by Anglia Ruskin University. The Committee accepted that the evidence showed that Mr Dar had not been a student of Anglian Ruskin University. The Committee took into account the evidence of Mr 1 and the fact that the false documents were extremely poor quality forgeries

8 that contained spelling errors, and that the letter had even been addressed to a different person than Mr Dar. 24. In relation to Allegations 1 b) i and ii, the Committee considered that Mr Dar s conduct, in causing or permitting the submission of false documents to ACCA in order to gain exemptions from examinations, was deliberate and dishonest, and satisfied the test for dishonesty in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67. The Committee also determined that Mr Dar s conduct was in breach of the Fundamental Principle of Integrity. 25. Regulation 3(1)(a) of the Chartered Certified Accountants Complaints and Disciplinary Regulations 2014, as amended, ( the Regulations ) provides that Every relevant person [that includes a student of ACCA] is under a duty to cooperate with any investigating officer and any assessor in relation to the consideration and investigation of any complaint. 26. Mr Dar was, therefore, under a duty to cooperate with ACCA s investigation against him. The Committee was satisfied that ACCA had written to Mr Dar at his address on the Register on three occasions in relation to its investigation. The letters were sent by ACCA on 15 June 2017, 7 July 2017 and 9 August 2017, together with further s. The Committee noted that Mr Dar had not responded to these communications. 27. The Committee was satisfied that Mr Dar was in breach of Regulation 3(1)(a) in failing to cooperate with ACCA s investigation. 28. Misconduct is a matter of judgment for the Committee. The Committee determined that Mr Dar s dishonest conduct, in causing or permitting the submission of false documents purporting to be from Anglian Ruskin University in a deliberate attempt to deceive ACCA and gain exemption from ACCA examinations, was misconduct. The Committee determined that Mr Dar had brought discredit on himself, ACCA and the accountancy profession. 29. In the Committee s determination Mr Dar s conduct in failing to cooperate with his regulatory body s investigation also amounted to misconduct.

9 30. The Committee, therefore, found that Mr Dar s conduct in relation to Allegations 1 a), 1 b) i and ii and 1 c) amounted to serious misconduct. 31. Allegation 1 d) ii was drafted in the alternative to Allegation 1d) i and so the Committee made no finding on this. SANCTION AND REASONS 32. Mr Ismail informed the Committee that there were no previous disciplinary findings against Mr Dar. 33. The Committee accepted the advice of the Legal Adviser who referred it to Regulation 13(4) of the Regulations and to ACCA s Guidance for Disciplinary Sanctions (effective from 1 January 2018). In considering what sanction, if any, to impose the Committee bore in mind the principle of proportionality and the need to balance the public interest against Mr Dar s own interests. The purpose of any sanction was not to be punitive but to protect members of the public, maintain public confidence in the profession and ACCA and to declare and uphold proper standards of conduct and behaviour. 34. When considering the appropriate sanction, the Committee took into account the aggravating and mitigating features in this case. A potential mitigating feature was that Mr Dar had no previous disciplinary findings against him but, in the Committee s view, this was perhaps not unsurprising given that his dishonest misconduct occurred when he made his online application for student registration. 35. The Committee considered the following to be aggravating features of the case: a. This was deliberate and dishonest conduct in order to gain an advantage for himself; b. Mr Dar had failed to engage with ACCA. 36. Given the seriousness of the dishonest misconduct and the breach of the Fundamental Principle of Integrity, together with Mr Dar s failure to cooperate

10 in the investigation, the Committee determined that it would not be appropriate to take no action and a sanction was clearly required. 37. The Committee considered the available sanctions from the least serious upwards. It paid due regard to the Guidance for Disciplinary Sanctions and, in particular, Section E2 which provided guidance in cases of dishonesty. It carefully considered whether it would be appropriate and proportionate to impose an admonishment or a reprimand or a severe reprimand on Mr Dar. The Committee, however, determined that to impose any of these sanctions would not adequately reflect the seriousness of the deliberate and dishonest misconduct in this case. 38. The Committee considered that Mr Dar s actions, in causing or permitting false documents to be submitted to ACCA with his application for student registration in order to gain exemptions from ACCA examinations, was an extremely serious departure from the standards expected of an ACCA student. In the Committee s view Mr Dar s conduct was fundamentally incompatible with Mr Dar being a student of ACCA. 39. The Committee determined that the appropriate and proportionate sanction for Mr Dar was removal from the student register. Such an order was necessary to mark the seriousness of the misconduct; to uphold professional standards, maintain confidence in the profession and ACCA as regulator and to adequately protect the public. The Committee was of the view that no other sanction would adequately reflect the gravity of Mr Dar s dishonest misconduct. Honesty and integrity go to the heart of the accountancy profession. Mr Dar s conduct, in dishonestly submitting (or causing to be submitted) false documents to ACCA and failing to cooperate with ACCA s disciplinary investigation, was fundamentally incompatible with him being a student of ACCA. ORDER (i) Mr Haroon Dar s name be removed from ACCA s student register. EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDER

11 40. This order shall take effect from the date of the expiry of the appeal period referred to in the Appeal Regulations COSTS 41. Mr Ismail, on behalf of ACCA, applied for costs amounting to 6, The Committee considered this sum to be a reasonable and proper sum for the work done by ACCA. Mr Dar had not provided the Committee with any information as to his current financial means. 42. The Committee gave careful consideration as to what would be a reasonable sum to order Mr Dar to pay ACCA by way of costs. Mr Dar had not provided the Committee with any evidence to show that he was not able to pay the sum claimed by ACCA that the Committee had determined was a fair and reasonable sum. In all the circumstances the Committee considered it appropriate and proportionate to order Mr Dar to pay ACCA costs in the sum of 6, ORDER 43. Mr Dar shall pay ACCA the sum of 6, Mr Ian Ridd Chairman 6 March 2018