The panel members were Mr Richard Hair PPNAEA (Honoured) (member panellist acting as the Chairperson for the Tribunal), Mrs Mary Charsley FARLA (member panellist) and Mr Stephen Shaw CBE (lay panellist). The presenting Case Officer for Propertymark was Mr Hadley Easterlow. The member was not present before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal considered the allegations set out in the case summary sent to Mr McKinney on 4 December 2019. It was alleged that Mr McKinney had acted in contravention of the requirements of the following Propertymark Conduct and Membership Rules:
- Rule 1.15: Timing of banking
- Rule 1.19: Books of record
- Rule 1.20: Supporting documentation
- Rule 1.23: Reconciliation(s) – format and frequency
- Rule 12: General duty to uphold high standards of ethical and professional behaviour
- Rule 20: Continuing professional development (CPD) rules
The Tribunal carefully considered the allegations and the submissions from the Case Officer before announcing their findings.
- Rule 1.15: Proven
- Rule 1.19: Not proven
- Rule 1.20: Not proven
- Rule 1.23: Proven
- Rule 12: Proven
- Rule 20: Proven
Mr McKinney had not filed a plea in mitigation.
- Rule 1.15: £500
- Rule 1.23: £500
- Rule 12: £500
- Rule 20: £250
In addition, costs were imposed of £145 Mr McKinney in favour of Propertymark.
The Tribunal made the following statement:
'The Tribunal is disappointed that the previous disciplinary penalties had no effect.
The management of the member’s client account is in urgent need of attention and we recommend immediate suspension of the member pending a satisfactory accountant’s report.'
The Appeal Panel members were Mr Jim Atkins PPNAEA (Honoured) (member panellist acting as the Chairperson for the Tribunal), Mr Richard Copus CPEA FNAEA (Honoured) FNAVA (member panellist) and Mr Clive Wood (lay panellist). The Case Officer for Propertymark was Mr Hadley Easterlow.
Findings and sanctions
Mr McKinney was found to have acted in breach of the following Propertymark Conduct and Membership Rules at the hearing held on 15 January 2020 and the penalties imposed on Mr McKinney were:
The sum of £145 was imposed on the member towards the costs of the hearing.
After considering the evidence and after deliberation, the Appeal Tribunal made the following statement of findings:
'As a result of what we have read and heard we find as follows:
In respect of Rule 1.15 we uphold the proven finding and the fine of £500.
In respect of Rule 1.23 we uphold the proven finding and the fine of £500.
We find that Rule 12 was not breached and reverse the earlier finding.
We find that Rule 20 was breached but reduce the fine to £200.
Together with costs towards today’s hearing of £163.
Mr Mckinney, you have re-applied to Propertymark for membership of ARLA, however the accountant’s report produced has similar deficiencies to the ones that led to today’s hearing. Until such time as a fully clean accountant’s report is received this Tribunal would object to re-admittance as a member of Propertymark.'
Download the full report
The downloadable report shows the full details of the rules involved in this case.