Suppose you are a Consultant’s Quantity Surveyor in a certain Project. You were out of the country in
an official duty, wherein your subordinate who has taken over your duties during your
absence had signed and sent a letter dictated by you, on your behalf, in your absence. Upon
perusal of the letter sent, you realize that the text in the letter is wrong and could lead to a
claim for negligence by your Client. What should be your course of action?
This is a very common occurrence wherein a professional is delegating his/ her duties to another professional to act on his/her behalf in his/ her absence. If your subordinate has dictated the said letter of his/her own without your knowledge, the case is completely different.
In this particular case, you were the one who dictated the letter. For some reason you could not send the letter under your signature and you have not informed your subordinate not to send the letter until you arrive. The subordinate may have sent the letter in good faith. Therefore the RICS GPES No. 5 “Take Responsibility” comes into play which states “This means being accountable for all your actions – don’t blame others if things go wrong, and if you suspect something isn’t right be prepared to do something.”
It is human tendency to hide things unless it is being noticed. Based on the same you may have thought of an option of “ignoring the fault hoping no one notices (option 1)”. This action will violate the statement of “…………….if you suspect something isn’t right be prepared to do something.” Therefore you have to drop that option.
You may have thought that your subordinate would have asked you about sending the letter prior sending and decide to “sack your subordinate (option 2)”. This action (or sending a warning letter to your Subordinate as a punishment of lesser degree which is the preferred option in lieu of sacking the subordinate which will depend on the degree and frequency of his/her negligent acts ) would have been possible, had the subordinate did get an express instruction from you not to send the letter. Therefore you have to drop that option.
You may have also thought to “send a correct letter to the client (option 3)”. This is a common practice amongst professionals wherein if a mistake occurs in a document you tend to say “please disregard the previous, attached is the correct version”. Though this option seems the right thing to do, the following statement of RICS GPES No. 1 “Act with Integrity” is violated: “Being open and transparent in the way you work. Sharing appropriate and necessary information with your clients and/or others to conduct business and doing so in a way so they can understand that information.” Even though you correct the mistake, you do not share the reason for the correction with the client. Therefore you have to drop that option.
Another option would be to “warn your professional indemnity insurance provider, and send a letter to your client admitting the error and providing the correct advice (option 4)”. There is a degree of uncertainty about the potential claim for negligence by the client since it states that “……… you realize that the text in the letter is wrong and could lead to a claim for negligence by your Client”. Though you are convinced of the fact that the text in the letter is wrong you are unsure about whether or not the claim for negligence by the client is definite. Therefore warning your professional indemnity insurance provider on something which is uncertain seems premature. Therefore though this option is not incorrect from the ethical perspective the decision seems a bit extra cautious.
The best option would be to “contact the client to advise him/her of the error and decide together on the action to be taken (option 5)” wherein you take responsibility, being transparent and giving opportunity to your client to look into a matter which has a degree of uncertainty involving him/her.
This is a very common occurrence wherein a professional is delegating his/ her duties to another professional to act on his/her behalf in his/ her absence. If your subordinate has dictated the said letter of his/her own without your knowledge, the case is completely different.
In this particular case, you were the one who dictated the letter. For some reason you could not send the letter under your signature and you have not informed your subordinate not to send the letter until you arrive. The subordinate may have sent the letter in good faith. Therefore the RICS GPES No. 5 “Take Responsibility” comes into play which states “This means being accountable for all your actions – don’t blame others if things go wrong, and if you suspect something isn’t right be prepared to do something.”
It is human tendency to hide things unless it is being noticed. Based on the same you may have thought of an option of “ignoring the fault hoping no one notices (option 1)”. This action will violate the statement of “…………….if you suspect something isn’t right be prepared to do something.” Therefore you have to drop that option.
You may have thought that your subordinate would have asked you about sending the letter prior sending and decide to “sack your subordinate (option 2)”. This action (or sending a warning letter to your Subordinate as a punishment of lesser degree which is the preferred option in lieu of sacking the subordinate which will depend on the degree and frequency of his/her negligent acts ) would have been possible, had the subordinate did get an express instruction from you not to send the letter. Therefore you have to drop that option.
You may have also thought to “send a correct letter to the client (option 3)”. This is a common practice amongst professionals wherein if a mistake occurs in a document you tend to say “please disregard the previous, attached is the correct version”. Though this option seems the right thing to do, the following statement of RICS GPES No. 1 “Act with Integrity” is violated: “Being open and transparent in the way you work. Sharing appropriate and necessary information with your clients and/or others to conduct business and doing so in a way so they can understand that information.” Even though you correct the mistake, you do not share the reason for the correction with the client. Therefore you have to drop that option.
Another option would be to “warn your professional indemnity insurance provider, and send a letter to your client admitting the error and providing the correct advice (option 4)”. There is a degree of uncertainty about the potential claim for negligence by the client since it states that “……… you realize that the text in the letter is wrong and could lead to a claim for negligence by your Client”. Though you are convinced of the fact that the text in the letter is wrong you are unsure about whether or not the claim for negligence by the client is definite. Therefore warning your professional indemnity insurance provider on something which is uncertain seems premature. Therefore though this option is not incorrect from the ethical perspective the decision seems a bit extra cautious.
The best option would be to “contact the client to advise him/her of the error and decide together on the action to be taken (option 5)” wherein you take responsibility, being transparent and giving opportunity to your client to look into a matter which has a degree of uncertainty involving him/her.
No comments:
Post a Comment