The panel members were Mr Jim Atkins PPNAEA (Honoured) (member panellist acting as the Chairperson for the Tribunal), Ms Jacqueline Stone FNAEA (member panellist) and Mr Noel Hunter OBE (lay panellist).
The presenting Case Officer for Propertymark was Mr Ali Haider. Mr Gresswell attended the hearing. Miss Brewer and Mrs Cosgrove were not in attendance but had authorised Mr Gresswell to represent them at the hearing.
Allegations
The Tribunal considered the allegations set out in the case summary sent to Mr Simon Gresswell, Miss Teresa Brewer and Mr Paul Cosgrove.
It was alleged that the respondents had acted in contravention of the requirements of the following Propertymark Conduct and Membership Rules.
- Conduct Rule 1.18: Record keeping
- Conduct Rule 1.19: Books of record
- Conduct Rule 1.20: Supporting documentation
- Conduct Rule 1.21: Preservation of records
- Conduct Rule 1.22: Computerised recording
- Conduct Rule 1.23: Reconciliation(s) – format and frequency
- Conduct Rule 13: General duty to uphold high standards of ethical and professional behaviour
- Conduct Rule 21: Continuing Professional Development (CPD)
Decisions
The Tribunal considered the submissions from the Case Officer and the bundle of evidence and after deliberation came to the following findings:
- Conduct Rules 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.23 & 1.22: Admitted
- Conduct Rule 13: Admitted
- Conduct Rule 21: Admitted (on behalf of Miss Brewer and Mr Gosgrove)
Sanctions
- Conduct Rules 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.22 & 1.23: £1500 (£500 each respondent)
- Conduct Rule 13.1.13: Warning
- Conduct Rule 21:
- £100 (Miss Brewer)
- £200 (Mr Cosgrove)
In addition, the costs of this hearing of £446.32 were imposed against all three respondents in favour of Propertymark.
Closing Statement
The Tribunal made the following statement:
'Mr Gresswell, we thank you for attending today’s tribunal and for admitting the breaches. It greatly assists us when our member is present to answer questions, it gives us a better understanding of what has taken place.
It remains, however, that your client account has been incorrect for a number of years, and whilst it appears that no client or tenant has been disadvantaged, we are disappointed that a full clear reconciliation is not yet possible. Whilst the collapse of ARPM has contributed to the problems that you currently face; it remains the responsibility of our members to check and reconcile their accounts on a regular basis.
We will expect that the current overage shall continue to be identified and an update on progress provided to our compliance department each six months until finally reconciled starting from today’s date.'
Download the full report
The downloadable report shows the full details of the rules involved in this case.
