Many thanks, Shaun, for your swift and detailed reply.

I am leaning towards the AAT now primarily because I think that will gain me more work whether I choose to continue temping or go the self-employed route (or do both together!), and if I can get a loan for the courses that would be the icing on the cake!

I seem to remember being told at college that a fully qualified Accounting Technician could do everything an accountant could except sign off the accounts for tax (?) purposes. Is this correct - and does this apply to the ICB qualification as well? (I might be totally wrong here, it was a long time ago when I was told that!)

Out of interest, how long would it take from me to get from a Level 4 Accounting Technician to an Accountant (if I wanted to in the future, that is....!)

I can see that I will spend tomorrow morning doing more research and phoning around the training providers to see who is the best fit for me. And then opening that Frank Wood's book!

Re - the IFA and IAB - I had not considered those, so I'll check into that tomorrow.

Thanks again Shaun, your time and knowledge is much appreciated.

"Hope that helps,

Shaun. "


YES, Shaun, it does: it's a massive help! After your explanation I can't see me taking the time to go the full accountancy route, given my age, so perhaps being an MAAT would be a good stopping place. I can get there first and then check out the IFA qualification and see if I want or need to add that to my portfolio of qualifications.

Thanks for the list of who to contact, I'll be on the phone to them all first thing tomorrow morning!

Thanks Dave, for your response.

I've checked with the ICB and because I took AAT Level 2 some time ago it can't be used for exemption purposes (which is fair enough, I knew I would have to refresh my knowledge anyway on the subject before moving onto the next level of courses).

I'm now tempted to do the ICB qualifications, and then (if I decide to do accounting as an office temp) I can work through AAT on the side. Or maybe I will stick to office admin on the temping side, and bookkeeping on the self-employed side. It does appear that short term temp roles for accounting functions aren't paid much more than general office admin anyway.

I'll keep on mulling it over, and thanks for your advice!

 

 

-- Edited by billabong47 on Monday 30th of September 2013 04:36:24 PM

I couldn't tell you this yesterday as the ACCA exemptions database was down for maintenance. But, its up today and I've done a couple of checks.

IFA gets one exemption only from ACCA paper F3 for DipFA, and F1 and F7 for completing the full professional accountant.

AAT Diploma in accounting gets one exemption from ACCA papers F1, F2 and F3.

From the above exemptions it is obvious that the ACCA consider both qualifications to only merit entry level exemptions but with AAT given credit for management theory, management accounting as well as financial accounting whereas IFA is deemed more advanced on the financial accounting side (F7 exemption) but has no acknowedgement of any management accounting or accounting theory even at the entry level.

These things are of course invariably a bit messed up as the other way around IFA only gives DipFA level for those who have passed all of the ACCA skills level.

I think htat the worst example of messed up logic is the ICB only giving a bottom of the barrel level I exemption for ACCA paper F3 passed within two years where the IAB, like the IFA (and I believe AIA) bend over backwards to sign up ACCA people with full exemption and straight to practicing certificate.

Anyway, the point that I was trying to get to was that I just wanted to let you know the exemptions that each gains if you did decide later to move to PQ status when you have a job working in practice.

kind regards,

Shaun.

Hiya matey,

I was beginning to get a bit lonely in this thread.

The key line that I picked up from Angies early posts was in relation to wanting to keep the door open to employment so geared the response more towards AAT or possibly IFA.

The AAT is the same as the ICB in that you can trade as a bookkeeper whilst learning.

My understanding was that you had a choice whether you want to upgrade to MAAT but if you do then you are more restricted than when you were a student.

The above said I'm pretty sure that the reasning behind that is that as an MAAT you are allowed to mention affiliation to the AAT but as a student you are not allowed to mention anywhere any affiliation so it's pretty much trading as unqualified.

I mentioned above about the potential for AAT and ICB as whilst a student it could actually make sense to trade under the ICB banner then once qualified with the right bits of paper signed off move to AAT.

I know, it sounds bad to treat ICB as a transient qualification but there is a psoitive twist to that in that if people become accountants by starting out as AAT but actually support their studies by being ICB then eventually you will end up with accountants who started out as ICB which should get them a little more respect from the accountancy profession as at the moment ICB bods are not even getting past the agents desk yet for many accounts assistant, sales and purchase ledger roles there is little if any major difference in the knowledge base required between AAT and ICB.

Of course that whole scenario involves the expense of two lots of subscriptions and exams and could only be sold on the basis of the increased networking opportunities available to ICB people.

Of course, considering the above reasoning you would think that ICB would be more like the IAB and IFA in welcoming accountants with open arms rather than the current attitude which is effectively creating the scenario where ICB people are unemployable in the profession because accountants do not really know what ICB trained people are capable of.

kind regards,

Shaun.

p.s. Don't be suckered into responding to this post Dave or you'll have the Carters turning up en mass at TL towers with a bucket of hot tar and bag of feathers. lol (just joshin James, I know that you don't really tar and feather your training providers.... It messes up the concrete when you have them burried in new motorway flyovers ).

Shamus wrote:

---

Hiya matey,

I was beginning to get a bit lonely in this thread.

The key line that I picked up from Angies early posts was in relation to wanting to keep the door open to employment so geared the response more towards AAT or possibly IFA.

The AAT is the same as the ICB in that you can trade as a bookkeeper whilst learning.

My understanding was that you had a choice whether you want to upgrade to MAAT but if you do then you are more restricted than when you were a student.

The above said I'm pretty sure that the reasning behind that is that as an MAAT you are allowed to mention affiliation to the AAT but as a student you are not allowed to mention anywhere any affiliation so it's pretty much trading as unqualified.

I mentioned above about the potential for AAT and ICB as whilst a student it could actually make sense to trade under the ICB banner then once qualified with the right bits of paper signed off move to AAT.

I know, it sounds bad to treat ICB as a transient qualification but there is a psoitive twist to that in that if people become accountants by starting out as AAT but actually support their studies by being ICB then eventually you will end up with accountants who started out as ICB which should get them a little more respect from the accountancy profession as at the moment ICB bods are not even getting past the agents desk yet for many accounts assistant, sales and purchase ledger roles there is little if any major difference in the knowledge base required between AAT and ICB.

Of course that whole scenario involves the expense of two lots of subscriptions and exams and could only be sold on the basis of the increased networking opportunities available to ICB people.

Of course, considering the above reasoning you would think that ICB would be more like the IAB and IFA in welcoming accountants with open arms rather than the current attitude which is effectively creating the scenario where ICB people are unemployable in the profession because accountants do not really know what ICB trained people are capable of.

kind regards,

Shaun.

p.s. Don't be suckered into responding to this post Dave or you'll have the Carters turning up en mass at TL towers with a bucket of hot tar and bag of feathers. lol (just joshin James, I know that you don't really tar and feather your training providers.... It messes up the concrete when you have them burried in new motorway flyovers ).

---

 Lol Shaun fear not the ICB conference is soon upon us and we have invested heavily on better tanks than this time last year. (Do you remember that thread?) Still makes me laughs even thinking about it, and besides I am a good boy now 300 days of the year, mmmmm is today one of them days?

Dave

Thanks Shaun,

I do think I will self study for the first level at least, and see how I get on. I'm fairly used to self study, being an ex Open Uni student, so I know I can be self motivated and work things out for myself.

As you mention, self study is not for everyone: I know of plenty who have started on the Open Uni route and couldn't discipline themselves enough to complete the course.

And I found the Level 2 AAT easy - though that's probably a lot to do with the years of book-keeping experience I had had before I started the course!

And yes, I did notice the David Cox/Osborne connection...and the fact that there's a lot of people out there recommending them or the BPP books, over the Kaplan (I've been doing a lot more research today!) I'll check out old copies on Amazon, at £2.81 or thereabout I can invest in quite a few!!

Hi David,

I thought that you were part of that one over on Linkedin in the discussion related to getting IFA moved to chartered status.

let me just have a glance at my old posts over there as I could be wrong.

Oops, sorry, no that was David Andersen.

The thread was this one : Do you think the IFA should pursue Charter status? Become the Chartered Institute of Financial Accountants.

Don't know how to redirect people to discussions in Linkedin groups? Certainly not coming up in a google search!

Are you are member of the IFA group over there?

kind regards,

Shaun.

Hi all,

I want to comment on a few points here, but before I do, Shaun this is meant as a constructive response and I am not getting at you or anyone here.

As some of you know, the ICB was formed from within the IAB/IFA because it was felt by some that their standards were not high enough and they did not support bookkeepers, rather saw it as just a basic stepping stone to becoming an accountant.

These people included the IABs president, tutors and people in business.

Therefore the ICB will always have high standards, and it may look unjust at times when comparing against the others but it was formed to be the best body for the best bookkeepers.

Since being formed, the ICB has grown to become the largest bookkeeping body in the world. So with these high standards, and with a few of the other bodies in some cases lowering standards to achieve growth, the ICB has become the leading professional body for bookkeepers.

 

"you would think that ICB would be more like the IAB and IFA in welcoming accountants with open arms"

ICB is for bookkeepers not accountants. If an accountant wants to become a bookkeeper (and many do) that is fine, but ICB need to make sure they have some experience in the day to day keeping the books as many do not (as it is something many have never done).

 

"creating the scenario where ICB people are unemployable in the profession because accountants do not really know what ICB trained people are capable of"

Bit of a generalisation; as I have pointed out before, many accountants work with ICB now. ICB is young, 16 years, but is making massive strides in the profession. Lets not forget that before the ICB, most bookkeepers were still unemployable for more than simple data entry as the profession didnt really exist.

However, ICBs job section gets 1 or 2 bookkeeping jobs a day added and feedback from the branch meetings is that members are too busy to apply. So I know what you meant; employable as in full time 9-5 for a firm of accountants, but just to be clear; the ICB career is huge and growing.

A few things that prove ICB is helping the profession get recognised: ICB got a Bookkeepers section added to Yellow Pages, ICB got bookkeepers recognised in the MLR by HM Treasury, ICB got PII specifically for bookkeepers, ICB is being consulted for the governments current tax agents strategy, ICB is regularly invited to parliament to discuss/advise on SME/business start-up policies, ICB holds bookkeeping specific conferences/networking events that big software companies like Sage and Google are desperate to attend to meet bookkeepers and much much more.

Not bad for just 16 years :)

 

"I think htat the worst example of messed up logic is the ICB only giving a bottom of the barrel level I exemption for ACCA paper F3 passed within two years"

Not actually true. ICB give exemptions from the highest levels and require they sit the lower bottom of the barrel :) examinations. Obviously many accountants can pass this, but many cannot. There is a difference between someone who has just finished an ACCA/CIMA etc. course with no experience and who skipped the entry levels to someone who has experience and AAT for example.

Exemptions are not black and white and all are looked at individually. ICB talk to applicants about what experience they have and the best way to join. You have to be serious about the profession though, you cant just join by sending an email and paying the entry fee.

 

Edit: forgot to mark out the quotes

-- Edited by ICBUK on Thursday 3rd of October 2013 03:23:22 PM

ICBUK wrote:

---

Can you hear the collective held breaths of all of the people waiting for my replay James, lol.

Hi all,

I want to comment on a few points here, but before I do, Shaun this is meant as a constructive response and I am not getting at you or anyone here.

As some of you know, the ICB was formed from within the IAB/IFA because it was felt by some that their standards were not high enough and they did not support bookkeepers, rather saw it as just a basic stepping stone to becoming an accountant.

Not the impression at all of the IAB which seems very much to have the same remit as the ICB but the ICB win hands down on marketing their product and procuct perception is the bulk of the battle.

These people included the IABs president, tutors and people in business.

Therefore the ICB will always have high standards, and it may look unjust at times when comparing against the others but it was formed to be the best body for the best bookkeepers.

The IFA is governed by the IFAC code of ethics for accounting professionals. There is nothing remiss about their professional standards. 

I am not saying that there is anything wrong with the ICB standards but I think that is wrong to claim superiority of ones own product. It is down to the end user to determin which is the superior product.

For example, the ACCA never claim to be superior to other bodies but it is generally accepted knoweldge where they fit in the pecking order.

To claim superiority of ones own product or to be disparaiging of others goes against various professional body interpretations of the IFAC code of ethics.

Since being formed, the ICB has grown to become the largest bookkeeping body in the world. So with these high standards, and with a few of the other bodies in some cases lowering standards to achieve growth, the ICB has become the leading professional body for bookkeepers.

But as seen on here previously is it not several bodies that share the same name with other jurisdictions not necessarily recognising each other for exemptions? (I seem to remember the South African ICB thread).

There is no denying that the ICB is a contender organisation but it is smaller than AAT and many would argue that AAT could be perceived as a bookkeeping qualification (which of course is if one chooses also a feeder into accountancy).

"you would think that ICB would be more like the IAB and IFA in welcoming accountants with open arms"

ICB is for bookkeepers not accountants. If an accountant wants to become a bookkeeper (and many do) that is fine, but ICB need to make sure they have some experience in the day to day keeping the books as many do not (as it is something many have never done).

Is there any difference? Bookkeeping is the foundation stone of accountancy. Divorcing the two is like trying to divorce a house from its foundations.

One can choose to offer only services to trial balance which to my mind is the cut off point of bookkeeping but how many bookkeepers are looking to offer a full srrvice?

How many of those accountants looking for an ICB practicing certificate expect to end at trial balance?

ICB has traditionally been a qualification which will give a practicing certificate, MLR, cheaper PII, networking opportunities, etc. But, those coming to it are as likely (if not more so) to want to use it for accountancy as bookkeeping.

"creating the scenario where ICB people are unemployable in the profession because accountants do not really know what ICB trained people are capable of"

Bit of a generalisation; as I have pointed out before, many accountants work with ICB now. ICB is young, 16 years, but is making massive strides in the profession. Lets not forget that before the ICB, most bookkeepers were still unemployable for more than simple data entry as the profession didnt really exist.

Whether you call a bookkeeper and bookkeeper, book-keeper, accounts assistant, sales and purchase ledger clerk or whatever the profession has been around for as long as accountants have needed others to handle data entry so that they are able to concentrate on areas furhter up the food chain such as data analysis, financial reporting and tax.

The ICB (like AAT and IAB) are doing a fantastic job of bringing up the quality of newcomers to the industry but the role existed long before the ICB existed.

I think that I see what you are going for in your reply in that you are saying that bookkeepers under ICB are now considered for more than data entry. But is that not simply saying that the ICB are working at creating assistant accountants and calling them bookkeepers unlike the AAT who create assistant accountants and call them assistant accountants.

However, ICBs job section gets 1 or 2 bookkeeping jobs a day added and feedback from the branch meetings is that members are too busy to apply. So I know what you meant; employable as in full time 9-5 for a firm of accountants, but just to be clear; the ICB career is huge and growing.

Quite, whilst ICB people are getting self employed work for employability they are not making it past the agents desk because accountants are looking for AAT qualified people because that is the route they came through themselves and them patches back to the comment I made that the ICB should be trying their hardest to get accountants on board in order to try and break that cycle of AAT trained accountnats hiring AAT.

A few things that prove ICB is helping the profession get recognised: ICB got a Bookkeepers section added to Yellow Pages, ICB got bookkeepers recognised in the MLR by HM Treasury, ICB got PII specifically for bookkeepers, ICB is being consulted for the governments current tax agents strategy, ICB is regularly invited to parliament to discuss/advise on SME/business start-up policies, ICB holds bookkeeping specific conferences/networking events that big software companies like Sage and Google are desperate to attend to meet bookkeepers and much much more.

Mmm.... what the government does do and what the government should do are often miles appart.

For example when developing the IR35 legislation representatives of indian software houses and management consultancies were advisors to the process but noone was invited who represented the UK contracting industry as like many the government gears their advisors in order to only be told the things that they want to hear.

I'm not trying to kock the ICB, indeed I often advise people to consider them as an option. I am saying that the ICB has got it wrong on their attitude towards accountants who are the ones who would see the ICB come up into the next division if you played them right and got more people who become accountants starting as ICB.

Those that you mention above are buzzing around you like bee's around a honey pot on the grounds that they can see profit on the back of you so are basically looking for profit by association.

You have created a good product, there is nothing wrong with your qualification, you have the membership, and you have the nouse to leverage your position (which to my mind is where the IAB are failing). You could move things up a gear if you looked more closely at a long term strategy of how to become accepted in practice.

Not bad for just 16 years :)

"I think htat the worst example of messed up logic is the ICB only giving a bottom of the barrel level I exemption for ACCA paper F3 passed within two years"

Not actually true. ICB give exemptions from the highest levels and require they sit the lower bottom of the barrel :) examinations. Obviously many accountants can pass this, but many cannot. There is a difference between someone who has just finished an ACCA/CIMA etc. course with no experience and who skipped the entry levels to someone who has experience and AAT for example.

Exemptions are not black and white and all are looked at individually. ICB talk to applicants about what experience they have and the best way to join. You have to be serious about the profession though, you cant just join by sending an email and paying the entry fee.

Are you saying that there has been a change of policy and that the ICB are now giving FICB membership to qualified accountant who can pass the Level I paper? (with no mention of F3 within two years).

Can I tell people that on the site?

Edit: forgot to mark out the quotes

-- Edited by ICBUK on Thursday 3rd of October 2013 03:23:22 PM

---

The above responses are intended only as constructive and absolutely no insult to the ICB is intended anywhere.

I do fear though that like the comment above about people buzzing around the ICB because there is profit in association, for the same reason they will be prone to telling you only what you want to hear which whilst good for the ego may somewhat cloud judgements.

I like Richard Branson in that respect in that he absolutely refuses to be associated with yes men and actively trys to associate with those who challenge him at every step.

You can be sure of that level of service always on this site James

It would be nice to find myself in a position five years down the line where I was advising people that ICB would get one employment as easily as AAT but thats really not going to happen until practice starts taking the qualification seriously and for that to happen accountants need to be coming up through ICB during their training years.

If you are serious about implementing the above change where trained accountants need only pass the level I to get FICB then I can see that working in your favour moving forwards.

kind regards,

Shaun.

Hi Brian,

On that line about student believing that they cn make a good living from bookkeeping I categorically state here that the regular training provider contibutors to this site are not guilty of this but I think that you know who I am talking about when I say that there are training providers out there who have made outrageous claims about what people can make as a bookkeeper in order to sell their product.

Whilst there may be the occassional person who does make the sort of money stated in the same way that there is an occassional lottery winner I think that its generally agreed that the claims of certain training providers in relation to bookkeeping qualifications have been exagerated beyond all reason.

In my area the market has been flooded with bookkeepers made up predominantly of those who are made redundant and believe some of the hype that they read without any idea about porters five forces or the general principles of supply and demand and plough their redundancies into retraining.... Some of them will never even make back their investment in their training.


As stated previously accountants do not recognise the ICB qualification because that is not the route that they themselves came into the business (which would have generally been AAT or straight to a higher accountancy qualification).

Thats was the point that I was attempting to convey in that the ICB should be bending over backwards to try and get accountants on side as in a market flooded with bookkeepers self employment will eventually cease to be an option due to competition so employment needs to be an option for ICB people which at the moment with a few exceptions it isn't.


For some jobs accountants command higher rates, for some jobs they don't. But, to quote an ICAEW advertising campaign from a few years back

"You can sleep more easily with an accountant".

Bit of a naughty ad for a chartered body but the message is clear. If you have a qualified accountant representing your business then you can rest more easily at night knowing that your companies affairs are being looked after by someone who has spent many years of study in order to be able to put together a P&L.



I have absolutely nothing against the ICB and think that they are doing a fantastic job of raising the standard of the start point of bookkeepers but I also believe that they need to consider their future client base in a market long since past saturation point.

Their future has to be competing against the AAT for the accountancy feeder market.

And of course there you have a whole different issue with the AAT being the child of the ICAEW, CIMA and the ACCA (although the ACCA did go off and create its own CAT qualification afterwards).



Non of the above is against those with an ICB qualification and there is still money to be made out there at the moment. Also those currently trading will grow by reputation.

The sort of ICB person that I am talking about here is the newly qualified just setting up in business who may be in for a shock in some areas when comparing the bookkeeper to businesses in need of a bookkeeper ratio.

Employment needs to be an option for these people and at the moment it's not because they are not even making it past the agents.


I remember the same thing happening in this market 30 years ago with pitman training which at the time everyone knew and used to retrain to bookkeeping. Look what happened to that market when accountants got tired of being deluged with CVs!

I think that the ICB have a real battle ahead of them to move up to the next level of acceptance by the accountancy profession and to my mind the only way to do that is by having accountants starting out as ICB so this would be a five to ten year plan.

Reminds me of a story I was once told about Napoleon. He wanted his troops to be able to walk in the shade so ordered that pollar trees be planted all accross France. One of his generals commented that poplar trees would take 20 years to grow to which Napoleon replied "Well, you had best get started straight away then".

Personally I want to see the ICB flourish. But, I think to do that it has to fundamentally change its perception of its link to the accountancy profession as currently it see's itself and bookkeeping appart from accountancy rather than a constituent part of it.

These are just my views and may be wrong and I welcome debate to tell me such.


kind regards,

Shaun.

lol, just saw that spelling mistake (reply as replay).

No wonder you saw it coming Nick.

There's a certain irony in that mistake methinks.

Hello,

I will respond quickly as a bit rushed off my feet today so please don't think I am being blunt or short :)

If an Accountant has the relevant ACCA papers within 2 years then they only need to do the Level 1 or the entrance paper and they can join as a Full Member. You cannot become FICB until you have been an MICB for 2 years, have 5 years work experience and play an active role in the ICB. ICB talk with each application as it might be you don't have the qualification but you do have the experience. Call the ICB if you are interested.

 

Please don't think I am down talking the IAB, each professional body has their own opinions and an opinion cannot be wrong (although it can be based on incorrect information )

ICB believe members should sit centre examinations before being able to set up self employed/get practice licence etc.. IAB give membership out to students who have only completed a tutor marked course, no examination. I am not saying that is right or wrong, but I am saying the ICB's opinion is very different.

ICB obviously deal with a lot of students, and most have the attitude 'I want to finish my course, gain all the knowledge, before I look for work/set up my practice', but a few think 'well this other body will let me do it now when I have only finished the first chapter, and I would like to start earning money so I will start taking on clients now'. Literally I have had those conversations and it scares me. I am sure some people disagree and think ICB is making it too hard to set up a business, people have told me 'you should let people have a practice certificate from day 1 and trust them not to take on work they are unqualified to do'.

 

ICB Global has offices in different countries, these have localised syllabus but follow the same structure and have the same standards. For example; An Australian member would never have heard of VAT, PAYE, HMRC etc. and so cannot just set up over here and start work. They must do study on the localised system before ICB will let them begin work. The majority of the syllabus is the same.

Some other bodies don't have localised syllabus and so all countries do either VAT or a Goods and Service Tax (GST) based examination in dollars or pound. Therefore they have no local testing for someone to do if they move country. If they are accounting bodies then IFRS makes it easier to transfer skills.

ICB South Africa is not part of ICB Global.

 

It made me smile when you kinda referred to software providers as yes men :) Quite the opposite, some try and bully their way around but the ICB is pretty strict with them. 

 

And just quickly on where do ICB see themselves in 5 years - probably with more support for employed bookkeepers, and a better bridge for members wanted to become accountants. Nick I agree level 4 is accountancy and was developed partly to help those wishing to progress towards ACCA/CIMA/ICAEW etc. Around 7.5% of ICB members are also with ACCA/CIMA/ICAEW (statistic from ICB survey 2012) and they probably represent a bigger % of the branch meetings. Therefore ICB has for some time been urged to make it easier for members to do this.

 

Hope that answers some of your questions, and no I/ICB don't take offence, these kind of discussions help me get a better idea on what people are thinking . 

Hi Angie,

Seems to disagree with what they wrote though in that any mention of AAT is claiming affiliation to them.

My understanding is still that one does not mention AAT at all in advertising materials until you are an MAAT MIP.

I could understand them saying that you are allowed to mention your qualifications when applyiing for jobs (temp or perm) but not in advertising a business as that undermines the status of MAAT MIP.

-- Edited by Shamus on Tuesday 8th of October 2013 12:53:06 PM

Hullblazer wrote:

---

 

I ended up phoning them to clarify the situation with regard to advertising my services, and they've told me that as long as I did not make reference to 'being REGULATED by the AAT, or claiming to be a member rather than an associate, I am allowed to mention my AAT qualifications.

 

---

 

Plus this makes it appear that I can mention the Qualifications as long as I don't claim a link to the AAT?  Or maybe "AAT Qualified (not affiliated)"?

-- Edited by Hullblazer on Tuesday 8th of October 2013 01:02:27 PM

---

 It seems that you can offer your services at any time as long as you don't offer or do any more than you have learned through your qualifications; and that you can use the name AAT in reference to your qualifications, but you cannot allow people to think that you are regulated by them.

Once I have completed Level 3 and 4 I can become an Affiliate member, until I have completed the necessary grunt work to apply for MAAT status, so I am assuming that you too could become an Affiliate member and perhaps stay as that indefinitely if they don't allow you to become a MAAT?

It might be worth giving them a call to clarify.  It took some time, but I eventually got the information above out of them!

 

FROM THE AAT WEBSITE:

Affiliate membership demonstrates that you have successfully completed the AAT qualification and that you remain connected with your professional body.

You can remain an affiliate member while you build up your work experience and enhance your skills, so that youll be ready to progress to full membership.

-- Edited by billabong47 on Tuesday 8th of October 2013 02:33:37 PM

Thank you Shaun - soon as I read it the meaning came back to me with a "Doh!" moment.

If self registered under the MLR/HMR&C rather than a "Body", what are the obligations to reporting (presumably just as per the HMR&C) and, for example "Data Protection Act"? 

As I refer to myself as "AAT Qualified" rather than "MAAT" (due to my lack of on-going membership), "CIMA PQ" and "QBE" (thanks again!) to what level CAN I assist my clients - bear in mind I WILL NOT advise on tax due to personal preference and lack of specific qualifications?  I obviously cannot sign off accounts as I am under no governing body.  Will ledger control/entry, TB P&L/IS and BS plus KPI provision provide me an income/living? 

Also, it is my feeling there is nothing wrong with me stating in my ad-blurb that I am AAT qualified as long as I don't claim to be MAAT.  Thoughts?

Sorry to be a pain.

P.

Here you go.

Not from the thread that I was searching for but from another thread where I had already copied a chunk out of it (it's in several threads but originally came from the AAT site) :

While you are studying for your AAT qualification, you can set up in practice.
However, certain restrictions apply until you become a full member:

You may not advertise in connection with the AAT.
You must only undertake work within your competence and seek professional advice where necessary.
You must abide by the our Guidelines on Professional Ethics.
You are strongly advised to take out professional indemnity insurance


Hope that helps,

Shaun.

Thank you for those two posts Shaun - actually really quite confidence boosting.

However, The AAT will not have me as a member because of a conviction (nothing that would affect my HMR&C "Fit to" MLR101). So what I interpret from your posts is I can't even mention the specific qualifications even though I have earned them?

Trying to think laterally - does my position allow me to say "Qualified Bookkeeper" in my advertising? I can then explain fully if clients ask?

Shamus wrote:

---

Thats actually an interesting point Peter.

Could I claim to be qualified AICB as I did even though I sent my qualification back (I cannot see any situation where I would want to claim that but its a similar principle).

Do qualifications expire when you you cease to be pay annual membership... I believe that they do. 

An unpleasant thought but quite possibly accurate.  However, the original post in this thread suggests that past/passed exams were valid with the body many years later.  If they weren't still valid, surely they'd not provide exemptions? Also, as the qualifications carry an NVQ equivalent surely that means they retain their validity?

It is a requirement to remain a member of any body that one is either a student of the body or maintains CPD. If neither of those then the qualification is lost.

If one passed their exams and then stepped down you surely could not then claim to be qualified if you are not maintaining CPD.

Surely the best that one could do is tsay that they passed x exams in y year but make no claim of qualification of affiliation beyond that.

Probably the safest route though.

interesting sub debate there.

I agree - and would be actively interested in seeing it thrashed out!

 

Presumably though - even if my Q's were thought "expired" for example, my history and experience would still entitle me to work as bookkeeper/minor-accountant?

---

 

You do make a lot of sense - however, there doesn't appear to be a body that'll take a member with a conviction, even if that conviction has no bearing on financial, professional or trading identity or history.

Then I will approach those; thank you!  I'll keep you informed