Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A valuer's values
In line with the global professional and ethical standards you should always act with
integrity. This means being open and transparent in the way you work and sharing
appropriate and necessary information with your clients and/or other relevant parties.
In this case the valuer has become aware that key information previously provided by
a client, whether intentionally or not, is false.
Broadly this means always ensuring that your client or others to whom you have a
professional responsibility receive the best possible advice, support or performance
from you. This includes being open and honest and not withholding information that
may be in the interest of a client, a local or international authority or the wider public.
To put it simply, not acting in a way that reflects badly on you or the profession as a
whole. In this instant you must consider the most appropriate course of action. To do
nothing once you have become aware of the facts is not an option.
Take responsibility
The global professional and ethical standards suggest that if something does not feel
right, you need to do something about it.
Advice
RICS members have a duty to act with skill, care and diligence and this includes
speaking up if they are aware, or suspect, that something isnt right. In the situation
set out in this case study members should ask themselves whether their chosen
course of action promotes the profession in best light possible.
From the point that the valuer is made aware of the facts in this scenario they have a
duty to do something. This may mean speaking to the client to get the full facts (for
example, was false information provided intentionally, or as a result of human error?)
or reporting the situation to the relevant authority. When making a decision the valuer
should consider his or her duty to be honest, transparent and to act in the public
interest.
Cultural variations to consider
When dealing with any kind of ethical issue you should consider how cultural
variations may have an influence on the situation. In this case the need to report a
potential breach of IFRS may take precedence over the need to withhold client
confidentiality in a local market.
RICS members, regardless of the cultural environment in which they are operating,
have a duty to protect the global professional and ethical standards for the good of
the profession. As such all possible measure should be taken to meet and uphold the
standards. When a member is aware of something that may compromise their ability
to meet the standards then they have a duty to do something about it.
You can contact RICS for help and advice at:
RICS Regulation Confidential Helpline
t +44 (0)20 7334 3867
RICS Regulation Helpline (non-confidential queries)
t +44 (0)20 7695 1670
RICS Regulation
e regulation@rics.org
You can also visit www.rics.org/confidential
Using the decision tree
You could use the decision tree, to assist you to dealing with this scenario. For
example, taking each step in turn, you might consider the following:
Do you have sufficient facts on the issue?
Is it legal?
Is it in line with RICS Professional and Ethical Standards?
Have you consulted with appropriate people to make an informed decision?
Do you have clear reasoning in reaching your decision? Is your decision informed?
Would you be content for your actions to be made public - in the newspapers or on
the internet?
If you answer 'no' to any of the above questions, then you should not proceed
In this particular scenario, you may not be able to answer 'yes' to the question 'is it
legal?' with the facts that you have. You may also want to consider whether you have
all of the necessary facts to make an informed decision.
In this instance the first step might be to speak with your client to establish the facts.
By explaining that you have reason to believe the information originally provided was
incorrect you might be able to establish whether false information was provided
intentionally or by mistake.
Once you are aware of the full facts you can make an informed decision on the
appropriate course of action. This might be declaring the fact that false information
was provided intentionally to the appropriate financial authorities.