Skip to main content
The Actuary: The magazine of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries - return to the homepage Logo of The Actuary website
  • Search
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on Facebook
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on LinkedIn
  • Visit @TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Visit the website of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries Logo of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries

Main navigation

  • News
  • Features
    • General Features
    • Interviews
    • Students
    • Opinion
  • Topics
  • Knowledge
    • Business Skills
    • Careers
    • Events
    • Predictions by The Actuary
    • Whitepapers
    • Moody's - Climate Risk Insurers series
    • Webinars
    • Podcasts
  • Jobs
  • IFoA
    • CEO Comment
    • IFoA News
    • People & Social News
    • President Comment
  • Archive
Quick links:
  • Home
  • The Actuary Issues
  • December 2017
12

Adjudication panel determination

Open-access content Tuesday 5th December 2017 — updated 5.50pm, Wednesday 29th April 2020

On 27 September 2017, the adjudication panel considered an allegation of misconduct that, while an IFoA student member, Mr Dominic Jevan Guy Morris (the respondent) was dismissed by his employer for gross misconduct.


On 27 September 2017, the adjudication panel considered an allegation of misconduct that, while an IFoA student member, Mr Dominic Jevan Guy Morris (the respondent) was dismissed by his employer for gross misconduct. 

On 3 August 2016, he entered excess time to his employer's time recording system for work on 4 August that had not been carried out and was not properly chargeable to clients. In addition, he took unauthorised absence from the workplace on 4 August 2016. It was alleged that the respondent's actions were in breach of the principle of integrity of the Actuaries' Code.

The panel determined a prima facie case of misconduct, imposing the following sanction:

  • A reprimand.

 

In reaching its decision, the panel had regard to the need for proportionality, while maintaining the reputation of the IFoA. 

The events involved deliberate dishonesty by the respondent, but he apologised and self-reported to the IFoA. Any loss caused by his actions was limited. The respondent co-operated fully with the investigation and said that it was an isolated error of judgement, made at a time when he was under considerable stress.

This article appeared in our December 2017 issue of The Actuary.
Click here to view this issue
Filed in
12

You might also like...

Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linked in
  • Mail
  • Print

Latest Jobs

Risk Actuary - General Insurance

London (Greater)
£60,000 - £85,000
Reference
145934

Project Actuary - Life Insurance

Midlands
£60,000 - £110,000
Reference
145933

Model Validation Actuary

London (Greater)
£60k - £80k
Reference
145932
See all jobs »
 
 

Today's top reads

 
 

Sign up to our newsletter

News, jobs and updates

Sign up

Subscribe to The Actuary

Receive the print edition straight to your door

Subscribe
Spread-iPad-slantB-june.png

Topics

  • Data Science
  • Investment
  • Risk & ERM
  • Pensions
  • Environment
  • Soft skills
  • General Insurance
  • Regulation Standards
  • Health care
  • Technology
  • Reinsurance
  • Global
  • Life insurance
​
FOLLOW US
The Actuary on LinkedIn
@TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Facebook: The Actuary Magazine
CONTACT US
The Actuary
Tel: (+44) 020 7880 6200
​

IFoA

About IFoA
Become an actuary
IFoA Events
About membership

Information

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Cookie Policy
Think Green

Get in touch

Contact us
Advertise with us
Subscribe to The Actuary Magazine
Contribute

The Actuary Jobs

Actuarial job search
Pensions jobs
General insurance jobs
Solvency II jobs

© 2023 The Actuary. The Actuary is published on behalf of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries by Redactive Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Reproduction of any part is not allowed without written permission.

Redactive Media Group Ltd, 71-75 Shelton Street, London WC2H 9JQ