Mr Nick Cound MNAEA

A disciplinary tribunal of Propertymark Limited was convened on 14 October 2020 using the Zoom virtual conferencing platform to consider two cases against Mr Nick Cound MNAEA.

The panel members were Mr Jim Atkins PPNAEA (Honoured) (member panellist acting as the Chairperson for the Tribunal), Mr David Coleman MARLA FNAEA (Honoured) (member panellist) and Ms Gillian Fleming (lay panellist). The presenting Case Officer for Propertymark was Mr Hadley James Easterlow.

Allegations

The Tribunal considered the allegations set out in the case summary sent to Mr Cound on 29 September 2020. It was alleged that Mr Cound had acted in contravention of the requirements of the following Propertymark Conduct and Membership Rules.

  • Conduct Rule 1.27: Submission of report or HealthCheck
  • Conduct Rule 21: Continuing professional development (CPD) rules

Decision

The Tribunal considered the evidence provided by the Case Officer and the submissions from Mr Cound before reaching their findings.

  • Rule 1.27: Admitted
  • Rule 21: Admitted

Mr Cound presented a plea in mitigation.

Sanctions

  • Rule 1.27: £325
  • Rule 21: £300

In addition, costs were imposed of £168 against Mr Cound in favour of Propertymark.

Download the full report

The downloadable report shows the full details of the rules involved in this case.

Document download icon

Mr Nicholas Cound (case 1).pdf
0.1MB

Allegations

The Tribunal considered the allegations set out in the case summary sent to Mr Cound on 29 September 2020. It was alleged that Mr Cound had acted in contravention of the requirements of the following Propertymark Conduct and Membership Rules.

  • Conduct Rule 1.27: Submission of report or HealthCheck
  • Conduct Rule 21: Continuing professional development (CPD) rules

Decision

The Tribunal considered the evidence provided by the Case Officer and the submissions from Mr Cound before reaching their findings.

  • Rule 1.27: Admitted
  • Rule 21: Admitted

Mr Cound presented a plea in mitigation.

Sanctions

  • Rule 1.27: £400
  • Rule 21: £350

In addition, costs were imposed of £168 against Mr Cound in favour of Propertymark.

Download the full report

The downloadable report shows the full details of the rules involved in this case.

Document download icon

Mr Nicholas Cound (case 1).pdf
0.2MB

Closing statement

The Tribunal made the following joint statement about these two cases:

“Having heard two cases against Mr Cound the tribunal has considered the mitigation of the admitted offences.

Whilst Mr Cound has delegated a considerable amount of the relevant account reporting work of the lettings part of the practice to Miss Keily, he remains the person responsible for ensuring compliance with our regulations in respect of Rule 1.27.

In respect of the admitted breaches of CPD submissions, the lack of record is the other reason Mr Cound is here today.

Following the first alleged breaches of today’s hearing we would point out that these were as a result of the third consecutive year of late compliance and Mr Cound should have taken appropriate measures to prevent re-occurrence.

Should further breaches of these rules occur we would recommend to any future Tribunal that they should most carefully take note of the history of all previous breaches of the reporting and CPD submissions by the member.”

Topics