• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

SJD Accountancy - prompting aw change?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by newbea View Post
    well, if you cannot understand the 'professional reference' then you obviously have nothing to do with contracting.

    The problem is the same...Former accountancy asked for pro references (as in - explanation for the trolls - sending through paperwork and company (and personal) accounts submitted to HMRC) in September 2019, still nothing received...Companies taxes are due by the end of Feb 2020. 6 months of emailing and chasing - from the current accountant, and myself -brought one response: "This should have been received, I will chase up our support team and complete ASAP." Again, if you have nothing to say - don't respond. I'm asking for opinions and views of people who've experienced a rubbish service overall, and not necessarily from this one company.
    So, you think you've been shafted by SJD because they failed to provide a reference?

    What material loss did you incur as a result?

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
      So, you think you've been shafted by SJD because they failed to provide a reference?

      What material loss did you incur as a result?
      Reading the thread..... I have concluded that the OP has managed to have the equivalent of ‘standing in your face, whilst shouting, with lots of spit, going red in the face and fists clenched’ but written rather than vocalised. This is quite a feat.


      The beef seems to be that SJD were late providing copies of information the OP already should have.
      It also suggests that CT money is owed to HMRC end Feb 2020 and the OP doesn’t know how much. This is odd as a quick logon to the portal will reveal this information as well as the tax return that’s been submitted.

      SJD have a poor reputation but this seems rather unlikely. And as the OP has now engaged with another accountancy I’m not surprised SJD aren’t being very helpful.

      That being said, when I left SJD there were lots of inaccuracies and delays, but nothing worthy of considering seeking any reproach.

      I wait with bated breath for the next thrilling instalment when the ban hammer is lifted.
      See You Next Tuesday

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by Lance View Post
        Reading the thread..... I have concluded that the OP has managed to have the equivalent of ‘standing in your face, whilst shouting, with lots of spit, going red in the face and fists clenched’ but written rather than vocalised. This is quite a feat.


        The beef seems to be that SJD were late providing copies of information the OP already should have.
        It also suggests that CT money is owed to HMRC end Feb 2020 and the OP doesn’t know how much. This is odd as a quick logon to the portal will reveal this information as well as the tax return that’s been submitted.

        SJD have a poor reputation but this seems rather unlikely. And as the OP has now engaged with another accountancy I’m not surprised SJD aren’t being very helpful.

        That being said, when I left SJD there were lots of inaccuracies and delays, but nothing worthy of considering seeking any reproach.

        I wait with bated breath for the next thrilling instalment when the ban hammer is lifted.
        Thank you for the translation from pure rage into something resembling coherence.

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by Lance View Post
          Reading the thread..... I have concluded that the OP has managed to have the equivalent of ‘standing in your face, whilst shouting, with lots of spit, going red in the face and fists clenched’ but written rather than vocalised. This is quite a feat.

          The beef seems to be that SJD were late providing copies of information the OP already should have.
          It sounds like it's the professional clearance request that they haven't fulfilled in a timely fashion meaning the new accountants haven't got a full breakdown of the opening position meaning they couldn't prepare the OP's accounts within the timescales that they wanted. So I wouldn't say it's information the OP should have.

          If accountants are late providing professional clearance then you can complain to their accounting body they are registered with. I can't see one of the major ones for SJD so it would have to be FCSA or IPSE which they are accredited by - per their About Us page.

          So I would complain to them and forget the class action stuff. Nobody else will really be interested as there are already contractual and regulatory remedies for virtually all of the issues that people encounter with these companies.
          .

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by VelcroPower View Post
            It sounds like it's the professional clearance request that they haven't fulfilled in a timely fashion meaning the new accountants haven't got a full breakdown of the opening position meaning they couldn't prepare the OP's accounts within the timescales that they wanted. So I wouldn't say it's information the OP should have.

            If accountants are late providing professional clearance then you can complain to their accounting body they are registered with. I can't see one of the major ones for SJD so it would have to be FCSA or IPSE which they are accredited by - per their About Us page.

            So I would complain to them and forget the class action stuff. Nobody else will really be interested as there are already contractual and regulatory remedies for virtually all of the issues that people encounter with these companies.
            .
            I wouldn't bother complaining to IPSE or FCSA - they are not regulatory accounting bodies. I am surprised if accountants are not members of one of the regulatory bodies such as ICAEW, ACCA etc

            Comment


              #36
              Originally posted by saptastic View Post
              I wouldn't bother complaining to IPSE or FCSA - they are not regulatory accounting bodies. I am surprised if accountants are not members of one of the regulatory bodies such as ICAEW, ACCA etc
              It is less likely for larger contractor accountants to be registered with the accounting bodies because a certain number of stakeholders/principals need to hold the relevant qualification and they like cheaper staff to drive the prices down.

              The likes of Maslins is where you need to be really. Sweet spot of good service, price and regulatory oversight. I am not paid by Chris to say this. I wish I was paid by Chris to say this.
              Last edited by VelcroPower; 27 January 2020, 10:04.

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by VelcroPower View Post
                It is less likely for larger contractor accountants to be registered with the accounting bodies because a certain number of stakeholders/principals need to hold the relevant qualification and they like cheaper staff to drive the prices down.

                The likes of Maslins is where you need to be really. Sweet spot of good service, price and regulatory oversight. I am not paid by Chris to say this. I wish I was paid by Chris to say this.
                Wow, thanks (brown enevelope of cash on its way)!

                Each institute has different rules regarding what % of which key people need to have what qualification for the overall firm to be able to use that qualification. Can get a bit complex. Some big firms aren't owned by accountants (they're owned by VCs, or a few wealthy bankers/lawyers/whatever), so typically they can't call their firm a qualified firm. They may however still have lots of qualified staff doing the actual work. Flip side is of course you can have a firm owned by one qualified accountant, but with hundreds of unqualified folk doing the actual work. Therefore you can't always read too much into it.

                There's pros and cons of huge, mid size, and tiny firms. Huge firms will have lots of systems in place and probably clever marketing, including useful e-shots etc which clients often like. However, you may find "your accountant" changes regularly. At the tiny end, a one man band accountant where you deal with "the boss" all the time can work great. However, may be less than ideal if they want a long holiday/are seriously ill/whatever. Don't think there's necessarily a universal right/wrong, personal preference of the client should help decide whether you want to be with a big/medium/small sized firm.

                Comment

                Working...
                X