22 DECEMBER 2005

NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE, No. 210

day of 31 March 2003 that contained significant
differences in the statement of operating results and
the statement of financial position; and/or

(d) knew, or reasonably should have known, that one
set of financial statements for the year ended the
31st day of March 2003 would be provided to a bank
and that the other would be filed with the Inland
Revenue Department; and/or

(e) knew that the financial statements provided to the
bank for the year ended the 31st day of 31 March
2002 and/or the 31st day of March 2003 contained
false and/or incorrect and/or misleading information.

Reasons

It was the unanimous view of the tribunal that this is a
fundamental issue of professionalism and integrity. Preparing
two sets of accounts by design and not by accident and to do
so repeatedly is not acceptable behaviour by a member of
the institute.

Orders of the Tribunal

(a) Pursuant to Rule 21.31 (a) of the Rules of the Institute
of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, the
disciplinary tribunal ordered that the name of Bruce
Frederick McCullough be removed from the institute’s
Register of members.

(b) Pursuant to Rule 21.33 of the Rules of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, the disciplinary
tribunal ordered that Bruce Frederick McCullough
pay to the institute the sum of $3,036.00 (inclusive
of G.S.T.) in respect of the costs and expenses of
the hearing before the disciplinary tribunal and the
investigation by the professional conduct committee.

In accordance with Rule 21.35 of the Rules of the Institute
of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, the disciplinary
tribunal directed that the decision of the tribunal be
published in the Chartered Accountants Journal, the
New Zealand Gazette and the Dominion Post with mention
of the member’s name and locality.

Right of Appeal

Pursuant to Rule 21.41 of the Rules of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of New Zealand which were in force
at the time of the original notice of complaint, the member
may, not later than 14 days after the notification of this
tribunal to the member of the exercise of its powers, appeal
in writing to the appeals council of the institute against
the decision.

No decision other than the direction as to publicity shall take
effect while the member remains entitled to appeal or while
any such appeal by the member awaits determination by the
appeals council.

Dated this 14th day of December 2005.

R. J. O. HOARE, Tribunal Chairman.

Important Notice: New Zealand Institute of Chartered
Accountants is the operating name of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of New Zealand.

gn8520

Notice of Decision of the Disciplinary Tribunal

of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of
New Zealand (Member Guilty of Misconduct in
a Professional Capacity, Conduct Unbecoming
an Accountant and Breaching the Rules
of the Institute)

At a hearing of the Disciplinary Tribunal of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of New Zealand held in public on the
7th day of December 2005, which the member elected not
to attend and was not represented by counsel, the tribunal

5361

found Edward Wayne Dick, of Auckland, guilty of the
following charges and the following particulars proven.

Charges

THAT in terms of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of
New Zealand Act 1996 and the rules made thereunder, and
in particular Rule 21.30, the member is guilty of:

(1) misconduct in a professional capacity; and/or
(2) conduct unbecoming an accountant; and/or
(3) breaching the rules of the institute (Rule 21.2 (b));
and/or
(4) failing to respond promptly to the communications
from the Institute; and/or
(5) filing to pay sums due to the institute by the date
specified for payment; and/or
(6) failing to comply with orders made by the
professional conduct committee and the disciplinary
tribunal.

Particulars

IN THAT in relation to a complaint to the professional
conduct committee, the member:

(a) unreasonably delayed transferring a client’s records
to a new accountant, despite repeated assurances that
the records would be forwarded; and/or

(b) allowed taxation arrears, use of money interest and
penalties to be incurred for the client between 2001
and 2004, and did not notify the client of the
problem; and/or

(c) failed to action the client’s instructions causing the
client’s company to be struck off and the client to
incur costs of reinstatement; and/or

(d) failed to adequately respond to the new accountants’
queries about the matters referred to in particulars
(b) and (c) above.

AND IN THAT in relation to a complaint to the professional
conduct committee and since the disciplinary tribunal
decision against the member for failing to respond to the
professional conduct committee dated the 5th day of April
2005, the member has failed within a reasonable and
proper time to reply to requests and/or requirements of the
committee as contained in a letter dated the 4th day of May
2005, and/or telephone messages left in July 2005, and/or a
letter dated the 23rd day of August 2005.

AND IN THAT the member has failed to pay the following
sums due to the institute within the specified timeframe:

(a) $5,000.00, being the monetary penalty ordered by
the disciplinary tribunal on the 5th day of April
2005;

(b) $2,836.00, being costs and expenses ordered by the
disciplinary tribunal on the 5th day of April 2005;

(c) $1,500.00, being costs ordered by the professional
conduct committee on the 5th day of August 2004;

(d) $1,500.00, being the monetary penalty ordered by
the disciplinary tribunal on the 23rd day of April
2004;

(e) $1,006.00, being costs and expenses ordered by
disciplinary tribunal on the 23rd day of April 2004;

(f) $1,849.50, being the cost of the member’s practice
review undertaken on the 17th day of March 2004.

AND IN THAT the member has failed to comply with the
order of the disciplinary tribunal dated the 5th day of April
2005 that his practice be subject to regular practice review
by failing to co-operate with the practice review board’s
attempts to undertake a practice review.

Reasons

The member has displayed a very cavalier attitude and
a total disregard for his responsibilities as a member of the