FCSA - Confused

[Hanbanthankyoumam]

Ok, so I'm hoping someone can clarify something i've just discovered.

Churchill Knight & Associates are FCSA accredited. Apparently umbrellacompanyuk.co.uk & bluebird accountancy (who also have bluebird umbrella) fall under Churchills accreditation. I dont understand how this can be possible; surely each individual entity would need their own accreditation?

Given that both umbrellacompanyuk.co.uk were incorporated in Aug 2019; I don't see how they will have had enough trading history for an audit to be possible?

Surely this can't be a thing, that the be all and end all accreditation that is the FCSA, can be piggybacked? Bluebird umbrella are also offering payroll at £7.50 per week, which to me just sets the biggest alarm bells ringing?

I only ask, as this is surely adding more fuel to the fire to the monopolisation accusations they've been facing?

This whole thing stinks!

[eek]

Ok, so I'm hoping someone can clarify something i've just discovered.

Churchill Knight & Associates are FCSA accredited. Apparently umbrellacompanyuk.co.uk & bluebird accountancy (who also have bluebird umbrella) fall under Churchills accreditation. I dont understand how this can be possible; surely each individual entity would need their own accreditation?

Given that both umbrellacompanyuk.co.uk were incorporated in Aug 2019; I don't see how they will have had enough trading history for an audit to be possible?

Surely this can't be a thing, that the be all and end all accreditation that is the FCSA, can be piggybacked? Bluebird umbrella are also offering payroll at £7.50 per week, which to me just sets the biggest alarm bells ringing?

I only ask, as this is surely adding more fuel to the fire to the monopolisation accusations they've been facing?

This whole thing stinks!

All I see is a number of separate brands targeting different market segments all using the same backend systems and services - I'm not sure what your problem is as except for some minor quibbles (I dislike the tax scheme page as other tax schemes try to push take home down to 70-75% or so by paying some tax while pocketing 15-20%) there isn't anything wrong there.

What I see is a well designed plan to use multiple brands to reach critical mass..

[Hanbanthankyoumam]

All I see is a number of separate brands targeting different market segments all using the same backend systems and services - I'm not sure what your problem is as except for some minor quibbles (I dislike the tax scheme page as other tax schemes try to push take home down to 70-75% or so by paying some tax while pocketing 15-20%) there isn't anything wrong there.

What I see is a well designed plan to use multiple brands to reach critical mass..

But they're not different brands, they're not bluebird accountancy trading as churchill knight, they're bluebird accountancy as an individual entity. So individual companies, with their own accounts & more than likely different operating structures. The fact that the fee varies between them, is enough for me.

Surely each individually registered company, should have their own accreditation.

[eek]

But they're not different brands, they're not bluebird accountancy trading as churchill knight, they're bluebird accountancy as an individual entity. So individual companies, with their own accounts & more than likely different operating structures. The fact that the fee varies between them, is enough for me.

Surely each individually registered company, should have their own accreditation.

How do you know they have different operating structures? As I strongly suspect (and their FCSA accreditation confirms) that their day to day operational structure will be identical...

And the fact the fee varies equally doesn't mean anything as I suspect that's the whole point of the differentiation, different price points different levels and types of service...

[Hanbanthankyoumam]

How do you know they have different operating structures? As I strongly suspect (and their FCSA accreditation confirms) that their day to day operational structure will be identical...

And the fact the fee varies equally doesn't mean anything as I suspect that's the whole point of the differentiation, different price points different levels and types of service...

I've asked the FCSA to confirm whether one audit was undertaken or one per each entity.

If its the case that each entity has been audited (I dont see how a thorough one could be undertaken given incorporation date) then absolutely fair enough, and it's just the fact they've grouped them together on the FCSA website.

If only Churchill Knight was audited, that is a massive issue - as how can they vouch for the other two! I wouldnt know if the structures are the same, but I would imagine there will be some variation given two are umbrella companies and the other an accountancy firm.

If only the one audit was undertaken, that could mean any FCSA accredited company could then open another brolly, perhaps not so squeaky clean this time, but still use the FCSA accreditation to get in with agencies.

As I said, the whole thing stinks to me - Amaze umbrella are FCSA accredited and they appear to have IOM and Malta associations.

Apparent more than ever in my opinion, the accreditation doesnt appear to be worth the paper its written on.

[Paralytic]

I don't see the issue here either. No different to, for example, Sky TV owning Now TV, but offering the same services via different packages at different price points and different customer service.

I'd do agree that the FCSA accreditation guarantees little though and that individuals should closely inspect the umbrella they choose. In all industries, ask yourself who is paying for the accreditation and you'll know who it is for the benefit of.

[lucyclarityumbrella]

They are not on the list of accredited members - so no they are not. They cannot piggyback the other business, it would need to be a separate accreditation - so a bit cheeky of them to try and use that. Seems the Bluebird service is half the price of the Churchill Knight offering too!

[Hanbanthankyoumam]

They are not on the list of accredited members - so no they are not. They cannot piggyback the other business, it would need to be a separate accreditation - so a bit cheeky of them to try and use that. Seems the Bluebird service is half the price of the Churchill Knight offering too!

Yup Lucy, they're not listed on the main directory page, but here in black & white as being accredited:

Churchill Knight & Associates Ltd • FCSA Accredited Member

They're also using the FCSA accreditation across multiple advertisements, including their own website:

Umbrella Company UK | Unrivalled Payroll Services for Temporary Workers

Glad i'm not the only one that thinks this stinks!

[eek]

They are not on the list of accredited members - so no they are not. They cannot piggyback the other business, it would need to be a separate accreditation - so a bit cheeky of them to try and use that. Seems the Bluebird service is half the price of the Churchill Knight offering too!

The FCSA are happy with it though as the membership page includes references and links to all their brands.

Mind you the FCSA really isn't worth anything except for the fact Professional Passport is even more lax.

[Hanbanthankyoumam]

The FCSA are happy with it though as the membership page includes references and links to all their brands.

Mind you the FCSA really isn't worth anything except for the fact Professional Passport is even more lax.

They're claiming to be this all powerful regulator; yet are potentially not auditing all accredited members? Whether they're happy with it or not, if they havent followed their own code of conduct & jumped through all their own hoops - then why should anyone take their accreditation seriously? Especially when its now such a kingpin in the industry and has made growth for smaller umbrellas nearly impossible.