back to article One more beancounter given a spanking over Tech Data chicanery

A former financial controller for Tech Data faces a rap on the knuckles and the temporary exclusion from the Chartered Accountants golf club* after admitting his role in a costly number-crunching scandal. The distributor formerly known as Computer 2000 revealed in early 2013 that it had discovered accounting errors in the UK …

  1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    How can you not notice that you're a bit short of change until it gets to £27m?

  2. sabba
    FAIL

    If malfeasance is found, and it sounds like is was, why are they not sitting before the beak and facing the prospect of a custodial sentence?

    1. Terry 6 Silver badge
      FAIL

      More important, is as stated they, or any other beancounters, are found to be guilty of financial misconduct why are they only suspended. Why not struck-off?

    2. paddy carroll 1

      because:

      Mitigating Factor

      a. Mr Silverwood fully co-operated during the investigation of the Misconduct;

      b. Mr Silverwood has a good compliance history and disciplinary record;

      c. Mr Silverwood held a relatively junior position;

      2

      d. Mr Silverwood did not stand to gain any profit or benefit from the Misconduct (save for usual remuneration);

      e. Mr Silverwood was subject to persistent and severe pressure in his role as Financial Management Controller;

      f. Mr Silverwood’s health, mental wellbeing and clarity of thought were significantly affected by the persistent and severe pressure he endured;

      g. Personal mitigating circumstances;

      h. Mr Silverwood has demonstrated contrition for the Misconduct.

      http://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/d2c28dbb-0f16-44aa-9b13-3b4a800196ec/Settlement-agreement-K-Silverwood-Edited-for-publication.pdf

  3. alain williams Silver badge

    Why did he do it ?

    Phil James presumably did it in the hope of some personal gain - make himself much richer. Yet the 2 fines were reduced so that it did not hurt him too much.

    It is only if others see that they will be completely cleaned out that they will think twice at doing something similar. However: what has happened here tells them that if they get caught then consequences won't be that bad ... so probably worth a gamble.

    What we are not told about are those who paid for this, people like share holders. Why should they suffer (and in similar cases to come) because the powers that be do not want Mr James to suffer too much?

    If he had been caught stealing food from a supermarket - how would he have been dealt with ?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why did he do it ?

      Yet the 2 fines were reduced so that it did not hurt him too much.

      They were penalties by the "professional" body that he was a member of. Fines (as in statutory penalties imposed by the courts) are a separate matter. If he was guilty of a criminal offence he should have been separately brought before the courts, and this latest penalty should be icing on the cake. ICBA to check if there were any statutory penalties. But do a search on "Phil James" "Tech Data". Personally I can't see this bloke doing any serious account work again.

  4. FozzyBear
    Flame

    WTF

    27M shortfall on their books and these guys get a slap on the wrist and a couple years in a time out corner. Reduced fines, etc due to mitigating circumstances. BULLSHIT !

    There is more to this than just an incorrectly assigned code or account.

    The beancounters here have been jacked up over a $2k difference on an account that has a value of $10M+ for the past 2 days. To not identify, or ignore, a 27M difference either points negligence or incompetence on a cosmic scale or criminal collusion that should see them locked up.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Facepalm

    One day...just one day....

    people will read the bloody article.

    1. This was a fine by his professional body, not a court. There may or may not be a court case related to this. Burden of proof may be lower in this case.

    2. He has been effectively struck off and lost his career. He can still be an accountant (as can anyone), but not in any decent role.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022