DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Amanuel Yemane Heard on: Wednesday, 29 November 2017 Location: The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, 12 Bloomsbury Square, London, WC1A 2LP Committee: Mrs Judith Way (Chairman), Mr Trevor Salmon (Accountant) and Dr Pamela Ormerod (Lay) Legal Adviser: Mr Iain Ross Persons present and capacity: Ms Emily Healy (ACCA Case Presenter) Miss Subagarey Pathmanathan (Hearings Officer) Observers: None OUTCOME: The Committee ordered that Mr Amanuel Yemane FCCA be severely reprimanded and that he pay costs in the sum of 4,000. PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS/SERVICE OF PAPERS 1. ACCA was represented by Ms Emily Healy. Mr Yemane was present and was not represented. The Committee had bundles numbered pages A JJ and 1 142 and a service bundle numbered pages 1 34.
ALLEGATIONS/BRIEF BACKGROUND 2. Allegation 1 It is alleged that Amanuel Yemane FCCA breached the Global Practising Regulations (as applicable from 2015 to 2016) by virtue of not holding a valid practising certificate with regards any or all of the following: (a) He carried on public practice during the period of 23 March 2015 to 7 November 2016 when he: Offered to produce annual accounts and corporation tax returns in respect of Client A; (ii) Offered to produce the personal tax returns of Mr Heruy; (iii) Produced the annual accounts of Client A for one year ending 31 January 2016, contrary to Regulation 3(1)(a) of the Global Practising Regulations (as applicable in 2015 to 2016). (b) By reason of his conduct in respect of any or all of the matters set out at 1(a) above, Amanuel Yemane FCCA is: Guilty of misconduct pursuant to bye-law 8(a); or (ii) Liable to disciplinary action pursuant to bye-law 8(a)(iii). Allegation 2 It is alleged that Amanuel Yemane FCCA breached paragraph 5 of Section B9 (Professional liability of accountants and auditors) of the ACCA Code of Ethics and Conduct (as applicable from 2015 to 2016) with regards any or all of the following:
(a) By failing to send Client A a letter of engagement, either before work was undertaken or as soon as practicable after the engagement commenced, during the period of 23 March 2015 to 18 November 2016. (b) By reason of his conduct in respect of any or all of the matters set out at 2(a) above, Amanuel Yemane FCCA is: Guilty of misconduct pursuant to bye-law 8(a); or (ii) Liable to disciplinary action pursuant to bye-law 8(a)(iii). Allegation 3 It is alleged that Amanuel Yemane FCCA breached paragraph 13 of Section B9 (Professional liability of accountants and auditors) of the ACCA Code of and Conduct (as applicable in 2016) with regards any or all of the following: (a) By failing to implement adequate procedures to handle client complaints during the period of 18 November 2016 to 5 January 2017; (b) By reason of his conduct in respect of any or all of the matters set out at 3(a) above, Amanuel Yemane FCCA is: Guilty of misconduct pursuant to bye-law 8(a); or (ii) Liable to disciplinary action pursuant to bye-law 8(a)(iii). Allegation 4 (a) Contrary to Regulation 3(1) of the Complaints and Disciplinary Regulations 2014, Amanuel Yemane FCCA 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 A.
(b) By reason of his conduct in respect of any or all of the matters set out at 4(a) above, Amanuel Yemane FCCA is: Guilty of misconduct pursuant to bye-law 8(a); or (ii) Liable to disciplinary action pursuant to bye-law 8(a)(iii). 3. Mr Yemane was admitted as an ACCA Member on 30 September 2008 and as a Fellow on 30 September 2013. The Allegations arise from an investigation conducted by ACCA following a complaint which ACCA received, dated 5 January 2017. The details of the complaint concerned work carried out by Mr Yemane on behalf of Client A, which involved filing their annual accounts at Companies House, ensuring that the Corporation Tax Return was filed and the Corporation Tax paid and filing the personal tax return for Client A s director. DECISION ON FACTS/ALLEGATIONS AND REASONS 4. Mr Yemane admitted: Allegation 1(a), (ii) and (iii) and Allegation 1(b)(ii); Allegation 2(a) and Allegation 2(b)(ii); Allegation 3(a) and Allegation 3(b)(ii); and Allegation 4(a) and Allegation 4(b)(ii). Accordingly, pursuant to Complaints and Disciplinary Regulations 12(3)(c), those Allegations were announced proved. 5. The Committee was only concerned as to whether Mr Yemane is guilty of misconduct in relation to each of Allegations 1(a), Allegation 2(a), Allegation 3(a) and Allegation 4(a). 6. In relation to carrying on public practice whilst not holding a valid practising certificate, as alleged in Allegation 1(a), the Committee noted that Mr Yemane, through this admission, admitted that he carried out public practice. Mr Yemane told the Committee that he has never been in possession of a practising certificate. Mr Yemane had, however, worked as an employed accountant for several years, more recently as a freelance accountant and has currently resumed employed status. The Committee considered that the period of time over which Mr Yemane worked on behalf of Client A was considerable and that the nature of the work performed by
him for Client A and its director involved fundamental aspects of public practice as an accountant. 7. The Committee considered that the requirement for a practising certificate prior to carrying out public practice provided essential safeguards for the public and was also necessary to maintain proper standards of conduct and behaviour. Accordingly, the Committee was satisfied that Mr Yemane s failure in this regard amounted to a serious breach of required standards and was misconduct. 8. In relation to not sending an engagement letter to Client A as alleged in Allegation 2(a), the Committee had regard to the Code of Ethics and Conduct and considered this requirement was mandatory for all professional accountants and was also essential so as to set out the professional relationship between an accountant and client. Accordingly, the Committee concluded that Mr Yemane s failure in this regard was serious and amounted to misconduct. 9. In relation to Mr Yemane s failure to implement any complaint procedures for Client A s benefit, as alleged in Allegation 3(a), the Committee also had regard to the Code of Ethics and Conduct. The Committee considered that Mr Yemane s failure in this regard was seriously disadvantageous to Client A and also had the potential to damage the reputation of the profession by leaving Client A without any information as to how to address any complaints or concerns. Accordingly, the Committee considered that this failing was serious and amounted to misconduct. 10. In relation to Allegation 4(a), whilst it is acknowledged by ACCA that Mr Yemane initially fully co-operated with its investigation, he failed to reply to three letters sent to him between April and May 2017. The first of these letters requested specific information regarding the investigation and the other two letters reminded Mr Yemane of his duty to co-operate and provide the information requested in the first of the three letters. 11. Mr Yemane advanced reasons concerning his personal circumstances as to why he did not reply to these letters from ACCA. However, notwithstanding the reasons advanced, the Committee was satisfied that a failure to respond
to requests for information regarding an investigation undermined the purpose of a Regulator, which is to protect the public by investigating complaints. Accordingly, the Committee was satisfied that this failure was serious and amounted to misconduct. SANCTION AND REASONS 12. The Committee took into account that Allegations 1 3 involved misconduct in relation to only one small business and that the sums involved were small. The Committee had regard to the written and oral submissions presented to it by Mr Yemane. Whilst the Committee noted Mr Yemane s submissions that he was not aware that he required a practising certificate or to issue an engagement letter or have a complaints procedure, the Committee considered that, as an ACCA member, he ought to have been aware of the relevant Regulations and Codes of Conduct and Ethics. 13. The Committee was satisfied that Mr Yemane had shown some insight and had taken steps to ensure that his misconduct will not be repeated by ceasing to offer any accountancy services outside of his role as an employed accountant. The Committee also noted that Mr Yemane s failures to co-operate with the investigation were limited. The Committee did not consider there to be any aggravating factors and regarded the lack of any disciplinary record, his admissions to the facts and his remorse as mitigating factors. 14. The Committee took into account the Guidance for Disciplinary Sanctions July 2017 (GDS) and had regard to its duty to act in the public interest, to maintain the reputation of the profession and uphold proper standards of conduct. The Committee concluded that the misconduct in this case was too serious for it to take no action or for an admonishment. Further, the misconduct was not of a minor nature and occurred over a significant period of time, making an order for a reprimand not a proportionate sanction. 15. Having taken all of the circumstances of the case into account and having carefully considered the factors applicable to severe reprimand, the Committee concluded that the only appropriate and proportionate sanction is a severe reprimand.
COSTS AND REASONS 16. ACCA applied for costs in the sum of 9,105.98. Taking into account the reduced length of the hearing due to Mr Yemane s admissions, the Committee regarded an appropriate figure of costs to be 8,000. The Committee then considered Mr Yemane s ability to pay any order, having regard to his oral evidence and Statement of Financial Position and determined that Mr Yemane be ordered to pay a contribution to ACCA costs in the sum of 4,000. ORDER 17. The Committee ordered that Mr Amanuel Yemane FCCA be severely reprimanded and that he pay costs in the sum of 4,000. Mrs Judith Way Chairman 29 November 2017