Example sentences of "[Wh pn] [verb] [be] found to " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | John David Berman FCA of PO Box 1495 , 141 High Street , Barnet , Herts who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he at Barnet between 31 March 1990 and 1 May 1990 passed clients ' monies through his firm 's office account was reprimanded , fined £500 and ordered to pay £250 by way of costs . |
| 2 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(b) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( ii ) in that he in London between 8 November 1990 and 3 March 1992 failed to deal properly and promptly with professional enquiries from chartered accountants in respect of a client and having been in breach of Bye-law 76(a) ( iv ) in that he in London between 7 January 1992 and 3 February 1992 failed to provide information required of him by the Investigation Committee on 7 January 1992 in exercise of its powers under Bye-law 80(a) concerning professional enquiries made by chartered accountants was reprimanded , fined £750 and ordered to pay £500 by way of costs . |
| 3 | ( FCA ) of , who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he at Grimsby between 6 March 1989 and 15 July 1991 whilst Financial Director of a limited company misappropriated monies totalling an amount in excess of £90,000 was excluded from membership of the Institute and ordered to pay £350 by way of costs |
| 4 | ( ACA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he at Iver , on or about 16 August 1991 , drafted a letter to be signed ‘ ( ACA ) ’ and permitted its use in circumstances which were not consistent with the good reputation of the profession of accountancy was reprimanded , fined £500 and ordered to pay £500 by way of costs . |
| 5 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he at Ivybridge between 1 April 1988 and 30 April 1990 whilst Treasurer of an organisation failed to deal properly and promptly with the financial affairs of the organisation for which he was responsible by virtue of the said office and in that he on or about 9 February 1990 improperly drew a cheque on the account of an organisation to settle a liability not incurred by them was reprimanded , fined £500 and ordered to pay £350 by way of costs . |
| 6 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(b) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( ii ) in that he in London on or about 23 April 1988 signed an audit report on the accounts of a limited company for the year ended 31 March 1988 which |
| 7 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he at Waltham Cross on or about 28 May 1991 drafted a letter of resignation as auditor of a limited company on behalf of his firm in terms not consistent with the good reputation of the profession of accountancy was reprimanded , fined £500 and ordered to pay £500 by way of costs . |
| 8 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he in London between 9 January 1991 and 30 October 1991 , whilst a partner in a firm of chartered accountants , misappropriated monies in excess of £300,000 was excluded from membership of the Institute and ordered to pay £350 by way of costs . |
| 9 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he at Peterborough between 21 June 1991 and 1 October 1991 passed clients ' monies through his firm 's office account was reprimanded , fined £l , 000 and ordered to pay £250 by way of costs . |
| 10 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Investment Business Regulation 2.32 in that in High Wycombe between 31 March 1989 and 14 June 1991 it failed to notify clients in writing of the amount and terms of commission received as a result of advice given to those clients and having been in breach of Investment Business Regulation 5.03 in that in High Wycombe between 31 March 1989 and 14 June 1991 it failed to give notice to its Bank that all money standing to the credit of its Investment Business Client Bank Account was to be held by the firm as a trustee or agent within the terms of the regulation was reprimanded , fined £l , 000 and ordered to pay £250 by way of costs . |
| 11 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that between 6 July 1983 and 9 September 1991 when joint liquidator of a limited company failed timeously to submit accounts to Companies House was reprimanded , fined £500 and ordered to pay £250 by way of costs . |
| 12 | ( FCA ) of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that at Ware between 30 April 1978 and 1 October 1984 his firm audited the accounts of a limited company when his wife held shares in that Company was reprimanded , fined £1,000 and ordered |
| 13 | FCA of who had been found to be in breach of Investment Business Regulation 1.32 in that in Camberley between 6 October 1989 and 22 August 1991 the firm failed to carry out a review of its compliance procedures in accordance with the terms of the Regulation and having been in breach of Investment Business Regulation 2.09 in that in Camberley between 6 October 1989 and 22 August 1991 the firm failed to warn clients of the extent to which they may be exposed to risk in accordance with the terms of the Regulation and having been in breach of Investment Business Regulation 2.32 in that in Camberley between 6 October 1989 and 22 August 1991 , when the firm gave advice to clients such that , if acted upon , it would result in commission being received , it failed to inform those clients of that position in writing in accordance with the terms of the Regulation and having been in breach of Investment Business Regulation 2.47 in that in Camberley between 6 October 1989 and 22 August 1991 the firm failed to issue engagement letters in accordance with the terms of the Regulation and having been in breach of Investment Business Regulation 2.60 in that in Camberley between 6 October 1989 and 22 August 1991 the firm failed to ensure that it had adequate records in accordance with the terms of the Regulation was reprimanded , fined £500 and ordered to pay £250 by way of costs . |
| 14 | FCA of who had been found to be in breach of Bye-law 76(a) ( ii ) , in that |
| 15 | That evening there was another line-up , when , as a result of the medical tests , four more people were turned away , including the Spaniard Alex had kicked , who had been found to be suffering from bronchitis . |