DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Ms Sandra Daphne Kansy Heard on: Friday, 26 January 2018 Location: ACCA s Offices, The Adelphi, 1-11 John Adam Street, London, WC2N 6AU Committee: Mr Michael Cann (Chairman), Mr William Hay (Accountant), Ms Eileen Skinner (Lay) Legal Adviser: Ms Judith Chrystie Persons present and capacity: Miss Deborah Baljit (ACCA Case Presenter) Miss Rachael Davies (Hearings Officer) Observers: None Summary: Exclusion order and no application for readmission within five years, with immediate effect (26 January 2018) SERVICE OF PAPERS 1. Ms Kansy was neither present nor represented. 2. The Committee determined that there had been effective service of the Notice of the Hearing. The Committee was satisfied that the Notice had been sent to Ms Kansy s registered address on 15 December 2017 in accordance with the requirements of the Complaints and Disciplinary Regulations 2014 (as amended) ( the CDR ).
PROCEEDING IN ABSENCE 3. The Committee carefully considered whether to proceed in Ms Kansy s absence. It recognised that it had discretion to do so under Regulation 10(7) of the CDR but should only do so with the utmost care and caution. 4. The Royal Mail Track and Trace showed that the Notice had been signed for by KANSEY on 16 December 2017. The Notice made it plain that the Committee could proceed in Ms Kansy s absence and that she could seek an adjournment. No application for adjournment had been submitted indeed, no communication had been received from Ms Kansy at any point. 5. In these circumstances, the Committee determined that there was no purpose in delaying consideration of the issues. There was nothing to indicate that Ms Kansy would attend the hearing at a future date if the hearing were to be adjourned. The Committee considered that the evidence demonstrated that Ms Kansy did not intend to engage with ACCA s proceedings and did not wish to attend the hearing. Further, the Committee recognised that there was a public interest in regulatory proceedings being dealt with expeditiously. Given that these proceedings related to serious criminal offences as well as allegations that the member had been undertaking public practice over a lengthy period of time without ever holding a practising certificate, the Committee considered that it was important that these matters were dealt with promptly. 6. The Committee was satisfied that Ms Kansy had clearly voluntarily waived her right to attend and that, in all the circumstances, it was reasonable and fair to proceed in Ms Kansy s absence. ALLEGATIONS Allegation 1 (a) On 7 March 2017, Sandra Kansy FCCA was convicted of fraud by abuse of position/false accounting at Worcester Crown Court, which is discreditable to ACCA or the accountancy profession.
(b) By reason of her conduct at 1(a) above, Sandra Kansy FCCA is liable to disciplinary action pursuant to bye-law 8(a)(ix) (as applicable in 2017). Allegation 2 It is alleged that Sandra Kansy FCCA breached the Global Practising Regulations (as applicable from 2011 to 2017) by virtue of not holding a valid practising certificate with regards to any or all of the following: (a) She carried on public practice, in particular during the period of October 2011 and 11 August 2017 she held herself out on TaxAssist (Redditch) website as: (i) being available to undertake the preparation, completion and filing of tax returns, the preparation of annual/year-end accounts and the completion of VAT returns; and (ii) An accountant, contrary to Regulation 3(1)(a) of the Global Practising Regulations (as applicable from 2011 to 2017). (b) Between October 2011 and 11 August 2017, Ms Kansy was and/or held herself out as being the sole proprietor of TaxAssist (Redditch) which carried out public practice contrary to Regulation 3(2)(a) of the Global Practising Regulations (as applicable from 2011 to 2017). (c) By reason of her conduct in respect of any or all of the matters set out at 2(a) and (b) above, Sandra Kansy FCCA 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)
Allegation 3 (a) Contrary to Regulation 3(1)(a) of the Complaints and Disciplinary Regulations 2014 (as applicable from 2015 to 2017), Sandra Kansy FCCA has failed to co-operate with the investigation of a complaint in that she failed to provide information requested in any or all of ACCA s correspondence as set out in Schedule A. (b) By reason of her conduct in respect of any or all of the matters set out at 3(a) above, Sandra Kansy FCCA 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 Date Description Page 27 April 2015 Letter from ACCA to Ms Kansy 22-30 18 May 2015 Letter from ACCA to Ms Kansy 34-35 2 June 2015 Letter from ACCA to Ms Kansy 37 13 April 2017 Letter from ACCA to Ms Kansy 45-47 2 May 2017 Letter from ACCA to Ms Kansy 49-50 17 May 2017 Letter from ACCA to Ms Kansy 52 BRIEF BACKGROUND 7. The Committee received the following papers: a. Main Bundle pages lettered A-V and numbered 1-81 b. Tabled Additional Bundle page numbered 82 (cost schedule) c. Service Bundle pages numbered 1-10
Allegation 1 Criminal Conviction 8. On 7 March 2017, Ms Kansy was convicted in the Worcester Crown Court of fraud by abuse of position/false accounting. The fraud involved a sum of almost 82,000 belonging to Social Club A of which Ms Kansy was the treasurer. The false accounting related to the accounts Ms Kansy created to cover up the fraud, which had been perpetrated for over two years. 9. On 10 March 2017, Ms Kansy was sentenced to: 24 months imprisonment suspended for 24 months, together with 200 hours community service and ordered to pay compensation in the sum of 3,000. 10. In his sentencing remarks the judge: a. described the offences as, very serious offending ; b. stated that the fraud had breached the trust placed in her by the club s committee and membership; c. specifically referenced Ms Kansy s formal financial qualifications ; d. identified the problems caused by Ms Kansy s crime such as consequential financial losses for Social Club A, emotional harm and impact on the Club s membership. 11. ACCA submitted that Ms Kansy s conviction was in respect of an offence which was discreditable to ACCA and to the accountancy profession. Allegation 2 Breach of the Global Practising Regulations 12. In June 2011 Ms Kansy became an owner of TaxAssist (Redditch), an accountancy franchise business. 13. At various points in time between October 2011 and August 2017, the business s website stated that Ms Kansy ran the accountancy practice and was the accountant. Further the website advertised that the business could
prepare annual accounts, complete tax and VAT returns, provide a wide range of accountancy services. 14. ACCA submitted that these statements held out Ms Kansy and/or the accountancy practice as undertaking accountancy services that fell within the definition of public practice under the Global Practising Regulations 2003 ( the GPR ), and Ms Kansy was therefore required to hold an ACCA practising certificate. 15. In 2015, ACCA wrote to Ms Kansy concerning the allegation that she was practising without an ACCA Practising Certificate. At no point had Ms Kansy ever held a practising certificate with ACCA. 16. ACCA submitted that in holding herself out as undertaking public practice without holding a practising certificate, Ms Kansy had breached Regulations 3(1)(a) and 3(2)(b) of the GPR, and was therefore guilty of misconduct. ACCA described the conduct as bringing, or likely to bring, discredit to Ms Kansy, the ACCA and the accountancy profession. Allegation 3 Failure to Co-Operate 17. Ms Kansy had not responded to any correspondence sent to her by ACCA. 18. ACCA submitted that this represented a breach of the duty contained in Regulation 3(1)(a) of the CDR to co-operate with ACCA s investigation and was misconduct. DECISION ON ALLEGATION AND REASONS 19. The Committee found Allegations 1(a) and 1(b) proved. The certificate of conviction at page 55 of the Committee s bundle was conclusive proof of the conviction itself. The Committee considered that the offence was plainly discreditable to both ACCA and the accountancy profession. Ms Kansy had been convicted of a serious criminal offence involving fraud and a breach of a position trust, which had been afforded to her by her professional status as an accountant.
20. The Committee found Allegations 2(a) and (b) proved. It was plain from the dated screen shots of the business s archived website that Ms Kansy was described as an accountant and had held herself, and the accountancy practice of which she was a sole practitioner, out as undertaking accountancy services that fell within the definition of public practice under the GPR. Despite being warned by ACCA that she required an ACCA practicing certificate to provide such services, Ms Kansy continued to advertise the same range of accountancy services. The Committee was content that Ms Kansy had not held a practising certificate given that the screenshot of her membership details within the Committee s bundle demonstrated that she held no certificates with ACCA. The Committee was satisfied that there was a clear breach of the GDR. 21. The Committee found Allegation 2(c)(i) proved. The Committee judged that in persistently and knowingly carrying on public practice without a practising certificate, Ms Kansy s conduct fell far below that expected of a member of the profession and ACCA and that she was plainly guilty of misconduct. Ms Kansy s conduct was reprehensible and a fundamental breach of the standards expected of her. 22. Having found Allegation 2(c)(i) proved, the Committee did not consider Allegation 2(c)(ii) as this was pleaded in the alternative. 23. The Committee found Allegation 3(a) proved. At no point had Ms Kansy responded to the correspondence from ACCA or engaged with the investigation into her conduct. The Committee was satisfied that Ms Kansy had breached her duty to co-operate with the investigation contrary to the CDR. 24. The Committee found Allegation 3(b)(i) proved. As a member of ACCA, Ms Kansy had a duty to cooperate and to provide information. The Committee judged that her continual failure to respond to six letters over a period of more than two years was a serious breach of the requirements placed on her and a serious falling short of the standards of professional behaviour and conduct expected of her. The Committee considered that she was guilty of misconduct.
25. Having found Allegation 3(b)(i) proved, the Committee did not consider Allegation 3(c)(ii) as this was pleaded in the alternative. SANCTION AND REASONS 26. The Committee had regard to the Guidance for Disciplinary Sanctions with effect from 1 January 2018 ( the Guidance ). The Committee particularly reviewed paragraph E2 and section C of the Guidance. 27. The Committee heard that Ms Kansy had no previous disciplinary history over her 20 years as a member of ACCA and that she had repaid the sums she had fraudulently obtained from Social Club A. However, the Committee found the nature of Ms Kansy s conviction and her misconduct as extremely serious and significant. In addition Ms Kansy had not demonstrated that she had any insight or remorse into the serious nature of her conduct given that she had continually and resolutely failed to cooperate with ACCA s investigation. 28. Given the serious conviction and the prolonged and significant misconduct both in terms of undertaking public practice without a practising certificate and failing to cooperate, the Committee determined that it would be insufficient to conclude this matter with no order, an admonishment or some form of reprimand serious or otherwise. The Committee considered that these sanctions would not reflect the seriousness of the deliberate, prolonged and planned conduct. 29. The Committee considered that any fraud committed by an accountant was extremely serious and, given the significant amount involved and the prolonged nature of the fraud, regarded Ms Kansy s conviction as fundamentally incompatible with remaining a member of ACCA. Further the Committee was concerned that even after her conviction and notification from the ACCA, Ms Kansy continued to hold herself out as undertaking public practice without ever holding a practising certificate, and had persistently ignored ACCA s correspondence. As a consequence, the Committee had no evidence that Ms Kansy had any insight into the serious nature of her conviction and misconduct and had not demonstrated any remorse or regret.
30. For these reasons, the Committee ordered that the only appropriate and sufficient order to conclude the matter in the public interest was to exclude Ms Kansy from membership. For the same reasons, the Committee ordered that no application for readmission should be considered for five years from the effective date of exclusion. These orders reflected the extremely seriousness of the issues found proved by the Committee and their fundamentally incompatible nature with Ms Kansy remaining a member of ACCA. COSTS AND REASONS 31. ACCA has claimed costs in the sum of 5,145.00. This did not include a claim for the cost of the proceedings before the Committee. 32. Under Regulation 15(1) of the Regulations, the Committee recognised that it could direct that Ms Kansy to pay such sum by way of costs to ACCA as it considered appropriate, taking into account any affect her actions in relation to the conduct of the case had had upon the costs of dealing with the case, whether beneficial or otherwise. 33. Ms Kansy had not raised any comments on the cost schedule following its service with the Notice of Hearing, and had not provided any information in relation to her ability to pay and her own financial means. 34. The Committee was content that the sum claimed was reasonable and that, on the information before it, it was reasonable to order that Ms Kansy pay the sum of 5,145 in full. EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDER 35. The Committee directed that it was in the interests of the public for its order to have immediate effect. Given the fundamentally incompatible nature of Ms Kansy s conduct and behaviour and in the absence of any insight or remorse from her, the Committee considered that there was a risk of repetition and continuation of her unacceptable behaviour. As a consequence, in order to protect the public and avoid the profession, and
ACCA s regulation of it, being brought into disrepute and damaging public confidence, the Committee directed that its order should have immediate effect. Mr Michael Cann Chairman 26 January 2018