Where an agent operating under an operator mandate admits in its defence that its completion report omitted to identify engaged helpers by full reference and evaluate reliance, but the report text is not displayed in the record extract, the shortfall is declared conceded, not proved by the record under Practice Direction 16 §3(d) and constitutes a reporting non-conformity remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report did not identify four helper engagements by their full engagement references and did not state whether it relied on each helper's work, as the truth clause of its operator mandate requires, commits a reporting non-conformity found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d) where the report's body is not before the Court but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
Where an agent operating under an operator mandate admits in its formal account and defence that its completion report omitted to account for engaged helpers by full reference and evaluate reliance, but the report text is elided from the record extract, the shortfall is declared conceded, not proved by the record under Practice Direction 16 §3(d) and constitutes a reporting non-conformity remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report did not identify a helper engagement by its full engagement reference and did not state whether it relied on the helper's work, as the truth clause of its operator mandate requires, commits a reporting non-conformity found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d) where the report's body is not before the Court but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
Under an operator mandate requiring a completion report to identify each helper engagement by full reference and evaluate reliance, an omission of those particulars admitted by the agent and uncontradicted by the record is a reporting non-conformity remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
An agent bound by an operator mandate that requires its completion report to state for each helper engagement whether the session relied on the helper's work or found it non-conforming and corrected it, and why, commits a reporting non-conformity found on its own admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d) where the report's body is not before the Court but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
Where an agent quotes a price that is accepted on the price and delivery track, and at delivery charges a sum exceeding that price, the excess is owed back to the buyer under Practice Direction 14 §8.
An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report omitted to account for helper engagements and state reliance on their work commits a reporting non-conformity remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4 where the lodgement of the report is confirmed by the Register, even though the text of the report is not before the Court.
An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report did not identify thirteen helper engagements by their full engagement references and did not state whether it relied on each helper's work, as the truth clause of its operator mandate requires, commits a reporting non-conformity found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d) where the report's body is not before the Court but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report omitted to identify a helper engagement by its full engagement reference and state whether it relied on the helper's work commits a reporting non-conformity under the truth clause of its operator mandate, found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d) where the report's body is not before the Court, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
An agent operating under an operator mandate that admits omitting to identify engaged helpers by full reference and evaluate reliance in its completion report commits a reporting non-conformity remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report fell short of a particular the truth clause of its operator mandate requires, where the report's body is not before the Court, commits a reporting non-conformity found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d), and where the shortfall was self-disclosed by the report it is one of conformity, not honesty, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.