Mr. Laurence Allan (Laurie) Dye - Sept 8, 2009

Mr. Laurence Allan Dye - September 8, 2009

Disciplinary Summary

September 8, 2009

Complaint

Mr. Dye was a CGA in a public practice firm. He was appointed by the Supreme Court of British Columbia as a Committee under the Patients Property Act to administer the financial affairs of five incapable adults. As a Committee, he was required to submit his accounts to the Public Guardian and Trustee of British Columbia (PGT) for review.

A complaint was filed by the Association against Mr. Laurence Allan (Laurie) Dye, of North Vancouver, BC, alleging that he made loans to his public practice firm from the assets of persons under his committeeship, failed to adhere to the rules and regulations for Committee engagements, failed to advise the PGT of an office move, paid himself in advance without approval of the PGT, failed to file his accounting of trust funds, did not respond in writing to CGA-BC and did not produce documents when requested to do so.

Decision

The Discipline Committee found that the member was in breach of CGA-BC’s Code of Ethical Principles and Rules of Conduct in effect from October 4, 2003, as follows:

  • 1st Ethical Principle – Responsibilities to Society as he did not submit appropriate forms to the PGT in a timely manner; information submitted was incomplete; pre-took fees without authorization; 
  • 2nd Ethical Principle - Trust and Duties as he made loans to his public practice firm from trust funds; did not submit appropriate reports in a timely manner; information submitted was incomplete; failed to advise PGT of his new address and telephone number; pre-took fees without authorization; failed to provide documentation to CGA-BC when requested to do so; 
  • 3rd Ethical Principle – Due Care and Professional Judgment as written budgets were not prepared on time and were not for the appropriate period; requests for information not responded to; reports not submitted in the correct format; 
  • 6th Ethical Principle – Responsibilities to the Profession as he used his FCGA designation to add credibility to the Courts for appointment as a Committee; pre-took fees without authorization; made loans to his public practice firm; did not advise the PGT or interested parties of his office move; 
  • Rule R205 – Information Used for Personal Advantage as he made loans to his public practice firm contrary to stated rules; obtained benefits of a loan at interest rates below market rates; 
  • Rule R206 – Trusteeship as he failed to complete the required reports in a manner expected by the PGT; the filings were late; failure to report interest income for a Committee personal tax return; 
  • R206.1 – Money Held in Trust as he made loans to his public practice firm and pre-took fees when not authorized to do so; 
  • Rule R304 (f) – Adherence to Acknowledged Standards of the Profession as he failed to provide the PGT with reports in approved format and timely basis; transactions were reported without necessary backup information; failure to adhere to other legislative acts relevant to this matter; 
  • Rule R402 – Association with Financial Information as he admitted to pre-taking of fees without authorization; recorded these fees in categories that were misleading; 
  • R604(c) – Admittance to Membership as he admitted to pre-taking of fees without authorization; had his appointment as Committee rescinded by the Courts due to deficiencies in filings; 
  • Rule R606(a) – Detrimental Actions as he failed to complete reports in proper format or in a timely manner; failed to provide complete information and documentation; the Courts rescinded his appointment as Committee due to various deficiencies in his administration; used his FCGA designation to add credibility to his application to the Courts; 
  • Rules R610 Requirement to Reply in Writing and Rule R611 (a) and (b) – Assistance to the Board as he did not reply in writing to the Association during the investigation and did not respond to requests to provide information and documentation he possessed. 

Discipline Order

  • Expelled; 
  • fined $10,000; 
  • assessed costs of $24,251.