Hi Dave
Welcome to the forum!

I have a couple of questions back first of all. Sorry I know I shouldnt answer a question with a question but hey thats just me!

Have you done all the double entry learning as part of the IAB2 Computerised package?

Also - what do you want to be when you go up .    I mean  - what are your aspirations in life, how far up the corporate tree do you wish to go - do you want to be FD?    Or happy in a team/heading a team that then reports in to the FD?

Hi Dave,

It all really depends upon what you are looking for. ACCA is a much higher qualification than AAT. AAT is a higher level qualification than IAB/ICB.

It's so much worse than three years relevant experience for ACCA. BUT... There is flexibility built into the qualification that unlike ICAEW there is no link between the exams and your work.

If you take all of your exeams with ACCA but do not yet have your experience then you become an Associate. At this stage you have earned your qualification but you do not get your letters.

To gain your letters you must have done three years relevant working for a suitable individual (not necessarily ACCA qualified. i.e. a CIMA or ICAEW person, or someone with perhaps a banking qualification can sign off an ACCA one). That individual does not need to be in practice but they do need to be in a supervisory position over you. Many getting their letters work in consultancy or industry where they may never even meet a practicing accountant. Also, it's not just getting soeone to sign to say that you have done three years. You need to get a number of experience elements signed off in order to justify your three years as being worthy of membership.

... That doesn't get you a practice certificate which is a different set of criteria. You have a Practice certificate training record where you now need to do a second three years (one of the years may be carried over so you could get a practice certificate with as little as five years signed off experience).

For your second three years working towards a practice certificate only a suitably qualified practicing accountant (ICAEW, ACCA, etc.) in an approved firm registered with the ACCA for practice certificate supervision, may sign off your Practice certificate training Record which again contains a large number of elements which need to be signed off before you are in a position to apply to become a practicing member.

That level of experience combined with passing the qualification (which at the P level papers is at MSc. level) is why the ACCA qualification is so well regarded as a badge of quality.

AAT, has lesser criteria but again there is an experience requirement. I believe one year. Joanne would perhaps be a better person to fill you in on the current specifics. Again, very well regarded qualification (it's a qualification that was set up by the big boys of the industry (ICAEW, etc.) with MAAT MIPs equiped with an excellent knowledge base to work with SME businesses.

ICB/IAB give you the fundamentals but lack experience (and ethics) requirements. Many posts on here have complained that the training is nothing at all like the real world which is very true but they are bookkeeping qualifications that are really aimed at stopping at trial balance. They have however both added additional parts to their qualification as I'm sure that they discovered that their promises of lots of work in the market place doesn't work when you are looking at working with the smallest businesses who expect a one stop shop rather than going to one person for the bookkeeping (up to trial balance) and another for the accountancy (everything after trial balance).

You can be practicing with one of the bookkeeping qualifications in a matter of a few months. AAT in around 2-3 years and ACCA generally around a decade. That said, AAT and ACCA allow you to do bookkeeping to trial balance whilst you are studying. The key with ACCA is that you cannot produce documentation that is depended upon by a third party for financial decisions beyond the company you work with until you have been approved to practice. For example, as an ACCA person you cold not prepare self assessments or company accounts.

ICB/IAB are not generally well thought of by acountants HOWEVER... regardless of what they may think there is no reason to include them on your CV (I've certainly got qualifications that I've made disappear). They give you a good introduction and firm foundations upon which to build. Either of them is easily the equivalent of AAT level II and even stretches into the next level. So no matter where you go with your career never regret that you took one of them. But then you could move from those straight to AAT level III via skillscheck or with some training providers directly.

If you pass AAT you can then get exemption from ACCA papers F1, F2 and F3 (The fundamentals level) and start at the skills level... Personally I would not recomend that and if you want to do ACCA I would do all of the papers as they ask questions in a different way to AAT with as much written between the lines as on them so you really need to get into the ACCA mentality before starting the skills level (F4 through F9).

My advice to you would be that now you have passed your fundamentals, lose the bookkeeping body and start at level III with AAT. You may decide that AAT is perfect for you and it's all that you will ever need (even if you decide tyo have your own practice). Conversely, you may decide that you want to work towards a senior management role in which case ACCA would be better after AAT. Remember that you do not need experience to take the qualification, only to gain your letters and possibly go on to gain a practice certificate.

Think about what you want the qualification for but all in all, you cannot go wrong with AAT. It's respected, it gives you firm foundations and for many career options it is all that you will ever need... And if you do decide to go ACCA they welcome AAT people as students with open arms (plus if you apply to practice, seeing MAAT to ACCA student is pretty much an expected route).

HTH,

kindest regards,

Shaun.

Shamus wrote:

---

And this is what happens when I dip in and out of an answer.. lol... Mornin Joanne, you got a mention in my post.

---

 Morning Shaun

Yep I noticed that!

edited out as further Q has crossed in post

Dave Lavelle wrote:

---

On AAT what level do you need to pass to open your own practice? to offer services - Do you really require the certificate to open a practice? I know a few people that are not qualified at all but still have a practice? Accountant are not like solicitors where you know instantly they are qualified and licensed to practice law. Accountancy is not officially regulated is it? I know bodies are trying to make it so.

---

No probs Dave,

On that last paragraph of your post that very much epitomises the reasooning behind this site as there are a lot of cowboys out there... Also some decent people with experience but no formal qualifications.

As you say, there's no legal restriction on practicing without membership of a professional body. The only restriction currently is that people must have Money Laundering Supervision. You get that from HMRC if you do not have a professional body.

However... If you make a mistake your client can sue you for you to put them back into the position that they would have been in had the mistake not been made. Some small mistakes can have enormous effect such as bank loans or overdraft facilities being rescinded. client legal costs, etc. To cover us for these eventualities there is something called Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) which all professional bodies make you have as part of getting a practicing certificate from them. he expectation is that you need cover of at last the lower of £50k or 25 times one's highest fee income. So, if you have a client with fee income for the year of £5k you would need PII for £125,000... Trust me that those lower limits are determined by the professional bodies sensibly.

Now here's the rub. If you dont have a professional body you may find it difficult (perhaps impossible) to get PII which exposes your firm to the risk that in the event of a claim the claimant could come after one's personal assets for that money. If you do not have a professional body and you do get PII the PII company may refuse to pay out in the event of a claim if it judges that you lack the required knowledge base to do the work that you were providing for the business that they were insuring. (insurance companies only like taking money. you have to repeatedly beat their fingers with a mallet to get anything from them).

So, short answer to that statement... Get qualified, get a practice certificate, get MLR cover from your professional body and get PII.

HTH,

Shaun.

p.s. Yes, the professional bodies are attempting to adopt more of a European model where accountancy is better protected. That would effectively prevent people without recognised accountancy qualifications from going beyond trial balance. I could not imagine the authorities doing that though without an amnesty period considering that the 2011 rejection of the pettition from the acccountancy profession was rejected by the then Labour Government on the grounds that too many working in this business would lose their ability to trade.