A concerned member has written twice to the ACCA leadership, but the Stalinist politburo running the ACCA has not responded. The eladership has already made sure that ordinary members are kept in the dark. Most members do not receive full audited annual accounts. The ACCA leadership would not doubt argue that members voted to receive 'summary accounts' at the 1998 AGM. True, but the leadership did not allow a full prior debate. At any rate, it can't even count on the support of 5% of the membership. So more than 95% did not support the resolution to receive 'summary accounts.
We reproduce the concerned member's letter below
14th April, 1999
The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants,
29 Lincoln's Inn Fields,
London WC2A 3EE
1999 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING- Second letter
Further to my fax letter dated 6th April, 1999, I would like to ask
following questions based on the published accounts which I received on
Saturday 10th April, 1999:-
A. Cash flows and implications.
In view of the global turmoil affecting many countries especially in
Asia, South America and Africa, the "telling signs" and effects are
apparently reflected in the accounts as follows:-
a. The cash flow statement shows a decrease of cash of £ 1,309,000
an increase of £ 579,000 (1997). - Page 6 of 1998 Accounts
b. The Association's debtors (Notes 13 -page 14) jump from £ 1,763,000
(1997) to £ 4,155,000 (1998) and the key points here are
i. Trade and other debtors jumps from £ 1,131,000 (1997) to £
ii. Amounts due from CAET - a switch of inconsistent policy to boost
c. Creditors: amounts falling due within one year
i. A significant increase of Trade and other creditors (Note 14- page
15) from £ 2,877,000 (1997) to £ 4,316,000 - an indication of cash
crisis as lack of cash - see Aa above.
ii. Income in advance - a sharp drop £ 755,000 from £ 4,124,000
to £ 3,369,000 (1998) lower than 1996's figure of £ 3,516,000 especially
1998's fees and subscription has an increase of more than £ 2 millions
over 1996. A sign of double jeopardy. If the 56% is maintained, the
income in advance in 1998 should be about £ 4,760,000 instead of £
3,369,000 ie a shortfall of £ 1,391,000.
AQ1: Please provide an age analysis of the outstanding membership
subscription to give an indication of the number of members who are
likely to default. This will affect the income of the Association.
AQ2. Why there is such a big increase of trade and creditors in 1998 ?
AQ3. Will the Council conduct a detailed review over the likely scenario
of this cash "crisis" so that we bring some relief to the global
membership to have a win-win situations for the Association because the
global turmoil may last a couple of years more ? Is the sudden surge in
student and graduates number of over 21,000 in 1998 a reliable indicator?
AQ4. Do you have a budget of cash flows projection for 1999 ? If so,
what is the likely shortfalls and how does the Association propose to
AQ5. Please indicate amount collected so far for the 1999 subscriptions
as per Acii above.
B. Statistics of members and students
The figures of students and graduates differ in 1998 as compared with
those printed in 1997 as follows:
1998 Accounts 1997 Accounts Discrepancy
1994 114,909 110,613 4,296
1995 123,115 118,668 4,447
1996 128,107 123,870 4,237
1997 134,721 127,066 7,665
BQ1. Is there any reason for the discrepancies when we have
sophisticated IT systems for some years ?
C. Investment Income of Consolidated revenue account (page 2 )
The restated 1997's figure of investment income in 1998 was £
when in 1997, it was £ 625,000- giving rise to a discrepancy of £
CQ1. Please explain the discrepancy.
D. The Balance Sheet and the related impacts:-
The balance sheet is affected by the changes of two major policies
introduced this year namely:-
a. The amount of £ 541,000 due from CAET previously shown as an
investment, now classified as debtors ( a current asset ) .
b. The unrealised gains on investments amounting to £ 6,640,000
inclusive of 1997's adjustment of £ 5,415,000.
These accounting treatments are substantially material in the balance
sheet as at 31.12.1998.
DQ1. What are the rational for the change of policy in the CAET
DQ2. It is prudence to show the investments / speculative assets at
with notes to the account about the market values. As no one can
guarantee the market values are stable in stocks and shares, what are
the objectives to show them other than in costs in the balance sheet.
DQ3. Since you have shown the investments at market values, please also
show in the Notes the market values at the date of signing of the
accounts. Please advise the market value as at 30th April, 1999 ?
DQ4. Please confirm that the changes in the policies one way or another
over the past ten years had been window dressing to benefit none other
than the people who run the ACCA affairs. Such changes of policies over
the said period had made measuring the financial performance and trend
thereof quite impossible.
E. Overall view
In view of the Malaysian suit of £ 32 millions which may have
on the Association financially or otherwise, we are hearing of it for
the first time from ACCA channel of information although the event took
place in 1997. I believe, it had other financial implications as it
affects Malaysian Institute of Accountants.
EQ1. In a worse scenario of losing the case, would you think MIA would
be in the position to indemnify ACCA for any substantial damages claims
in full ? Is ACCA totally blameless ? Would that be another suit
EQ2. Would the ACCA update members in a regular news release of this
EQ3. Was the ACCA Council informed in 1997 when the event took place
especially ACCA has a Malaysian member in the UK Council ?
Please acknowledge receipt.