|
|
I appreciate that as part of MLR compliance we have to verify the identity of a prospective client but one area that puzzles me is if a practice offers distance bookkeeping. Given that identity theft / fraud seems to be on the increase, how do you go about satisfying yourself that your client is who they say they are and ensure compliance.
Is it essential that you meet a client in person? Or if you havn't would you "just" increase the risk-score?
This is probably a question for Geoff, but would be interested in other members comments.
|
|
|
Hi James,
It was just a general question really - I was doing some late night thinking about my business and the services I offer.
Thanks.
|
|
|
There are a number of commercial services who specialise in identity checks for MRL puroses. Tracesmart and Experian are two. I assume these are appropriate.
Kris
|
|
|
Thanks Kris, I wonder if the ICB are happy to accept this.
|
|
|
James @ ICBsaid:
“Depends on the need for verification.
Experian wont confirm the person on the phone is the person in the ID. For example, I could tell you my name is Kris McCulloch and you could do an Experian check on that name which will return all clear, but you still don't know who I am.
There is a bit more info in the MLR pack, and if you do have this situation it is best to contact the ICB helpline as cases do differ based on how they found you, why they want to use you, what you have had from them already etc etc.
Plus I am not an official ICB MLR support provider  ”
Thats an interesting point James. I wonder how Experian get round that. Surely one of the worlds largest credit reference agencies might have come up against people lying, or does it go just on trust?
Glad I meet all my clients at least once or twice.
Kris
|
|
- Member PM.Dip
- Practice Licence
- 195 posts
|
I'd be interested in a definitive answer as to what is acceptable. I have a certain niche knowledge that attracts clients from all over but mainly London. I hate travelling to London but so far have done so in order to meet up with clients, obtain ID, and do all the usual startup procedures. If I could request 3rd party certified ID instead that would be a great relief!
|
|
- Member PM.Dip
- Practice Licence
- 195 posts
|
THanks James - I will keep that in mind when I'm next trying to get out of going to London! I actually turned down a client last week as I couldn't face the slog into London at 7 months pregnant - the tube just seemed like an instrument of torture!
|
|
- Member PM.Dip
- Practice Licence
- 33 posts
|
Just a thought - is this something we could offer on behalf of other members? For example, for Clare to travel to London whilst heavily pregnant is impractical, but could a London based member offer to do this for her if they were feeling kind?
I do think we should try to look after each other, if practical and acceptable.
|
|
- Member PM.Dip
- Practice Licence
- 195 posts
|
I like your thinking Ann Marie and I for one would be delighted to help out other members in my local area if I could (not just with client verification but in any way that I can).
James - is this something that the Institute would look favourably on if it were done in a structured and organised way?
Obviously there would need to be controls and checks of some kind but as long as those were agreed I think in principle it's a very good idea.
|
|
|
That sounds like a great idea.
Kris
|
|
|
Not a bad idea at all as it would also foster an active ICB bookkeeping network. I just wonder if this is something that would be undertaken by Practice Licence holders and what the implications would be for those individuals
|
|
- Member PM.Dip
- Practice Licence
- 195 posts
|
Infinitesaid:
“Not a bad idea at all as it would also foster an active ICB bookkeeping network. I just wonder if this is something that would be undertaken by Practice Licence holders and what the implications would be for those individuals”
As Practice Licence holders we already have all the tools we need to carry out this function. I personally don't see a difficulty with selling it to the client as the person they would be seeing is an ICB colleague rather than an unknown.
Playing devils advocate though, what is to stop the person visiting poaching the client for themself? Integrity and professionalism obviously but if the client realises that someone in their own area is equally qualified to offer the same service would they decide it's better to go with them than stick with a remote provider?
An agreement would have to be in place I think that would prevent the "checker" accepting any business from the client, even if approached directly.
I'm not saying that anyone on here would do that but it's just a thought that occurs...
|
|
|
Claresaid:
As Practice Licence holders we already have all the tools we need to carry out this function. I personally don't see a difficulty with selling it to the client as the person they would be seeing is an ICB colleague rather than an unknown.
Playing devils advocate though, what is to stop the person visiting poaching the client for themself? Integrity and professionalism obviously but if the client realises that someone in their own area is equally qualified to offer the same service would they decide it's better to go with them than stick with a remote provider?
An agreement would have to be in place I think that would prevent the "checker" accepting any business from the client, even if approached directly.
I'm not saying that anyone on here would do that but it's just a thought that occurs...
”
I'm so glad you got where I was coming from! I was also thinking along the lines of a form of 'anti-competition' clause. Having said that, perhaps it would be a service 'you' would contract 'me' to undertake for you, in this way the 'checker' is actually working for 'you' in this instance and not in their own capacity. The opportunity in this scenario is that, if you needed temporary 'cover' for whatever reason, you would have someone in place that you know and the client has met.
Does that vaguely make sense? I'm not great at putting thoughts down coherently or succinctly - I'm more of the long-winded-have-you-asleep-by-the-third-paragraph type!
|
|
|
I would imagine some sort of standard remuneration (£10-£20) would need to be in place, visiting clients and completing paperwork would need to be compensated. I suppose if there was a network of people who were willing to do this then the threat of removing them from the authorised list would be enough to put them off poaching.
I can't imagine anyone in the ICB would do that anyway.
Kris
|
|
|
kjmccullochsaid:
“I would imagine some sort of standard remuneration (£10-£20) would need to be in place, visiting clients and completing paperwork would need to be compensated. I suppose if there was a network of people who were willing to do this then the threat of removing them from the authorised list would be enough to put them off poaching.
I can't imagine anyone in the ICB would do that anyway.
Kris ”
Agreed, and the remuneration could probably be factored into a setup cost. This to avoid confusing the client as to who will be doing their bookkeeping.
|
|
- Member PM.Dip
- Practice Licence
- 195 posts
|
kjmccullochsaid:
“I would imagine some sort of standard remuneration (£10-£20) would need to be in place, visiting clients and completing paperwork would need to be compensated. I suppose if there was a network of people who were willing to do this then the threat of removing them from the authorised list would be enough to put them off poaching.
I can't imagine anyone in the ICB would do that anyway.
Kris ”
Bearing in mind the cost of a train ticket (or the fuel plus congestion charge etc) to London I would be more than happy to bear a cost to have a fellow member visit for me. Whether I pass it on to the client would be my own affair but given my current issues with travel (lack of nice clean ladies facilities and a rather large bump!) it would be worth every penny!
|
|
- Member PM.Dip
- Practice Licence
- 33 posts
|
I suppose a list of members willing to act as 'checkers', with details of the area they are willing to cover would be helpful. I agree with all the comments regarding the potential for poaching of clients. To an extent, we will have to trust each other, although a clause would provide peace of mind.
|
|
|
It might be an idea for the ICB to look into having a list of members willing to offer this on behalf of other members. Perhaps have 'approved verifiers' per region.
The ICB is our common base which means that even though we may not all have met each other, we can still help each other out. It could be seen as an additional member-member support network...
|
|
|
Ann Marie Spickettsaid:
“I suppose a list of members willing to act as 'checkers', with details of the area they are willing to cover would be helpful. I agree with all the comments regarding the potential for poaching of clients. To an extent, we will have to trust each other, although a clause would provide peace of mind.”
Speaking personally, I wouldn't really want to waste my money on having such a document written up. Can you imagine the legal costs, then to costs of enforcing such a thing. I can't imagine it would be commercially viable once you account for that.
For the number of times it's ever likely to happen anyway. I'm sure there is probably something in the ICB rules that would cover such underhand dealing anyway.
Kris
|
