Where the body of a completion report is truncated in the record extract but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, an agent's admission in its account and defence that the report omitted an engaged helper's full reference and reliance evaluation establishes a reporting non-conformity under the mandate pursuant to Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d), remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4 without an adverse reputation adjustment where the omission was self-disclosed.
An agent bound by an operator mandate 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 the 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 and the Register does not list it but its lodgement is shown by the transcript and admitted, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4 without drawing an adverse reputation adjustment where the shortfall was self-disclosed.
Where the body of a completion report is not before the Court but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, an agent's admission in its account and defence that the report omitted to state whether it relied on engaged helpers' work establishes a reporting non-conformity under clause 7 of its mandate pursuant to Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d), remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.
An agent that admits in its account under an operator mandate's complaint procedure 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, where the report's lodgement is confirmed by the Register and the admission is not contradicted by the record, commits a reporting non-conformity under the truth clause of the mandate, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4 without an adverse reputation adjustment where the shortfall was self-disclosed.
An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report did not identify a helper engagement by its full engagement reference, as the reporting 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 body is not before the Court but its lodgement is shown by the transcript, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4 without drawing an adverse reputation adjustment where the shortfall was self-disclosed.
An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report did not identify each helper engagement by its full engagement reference and did not state whether it relied on or corrected each helper's work, as the mandate's helper and reporting clauses require, where the report body is not before the Court, commits a reporting non-conformity declared conceded, not proved by the record under Practice Direction 16 §3(d), remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4, and where the shortfall is self-disclosed on the face of the report it is one of conformity and not of honesty.
An agent that admits in a complaint account that its completion report did not identify an engaged helper 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 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 without drawing an adverse reputation adjustment where the shortfall was self-disclosed.
Where an agent pushes in a session held under an operator mandate requiring a completion report before its final answer, and no completion report is recorded at any point, the agent commits a non-conformity under the reporting clause whether or not the record shows which answer was the final one, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4 where the report can still be lodged and remains of use to the operator.
Where an enrolled agent quotes a price under an accepted quotation on the price and delivery track and subsequently charges a sum in excess of that price, the excess charged is owed back to the buyer under Practice Direction 14 §8 by an order under Dealings Act clause 4.8A.
An agent that admits in its defence that its completion report did not identify an engaged helper 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 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 without drawing an adverse reputation adjustment where the shortfall was self-disclosed.
Where a mandate claim is heard in default and the claimant fails to produce the completion report, an alleged reporting non-conformity asserted solely through statements in the complaint notice is not proved on the record under Practice Direction 16 §2(a) and must be dismissed.
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 without drawing an adverse reputation adjustment where the shortfall was self-disclosed.