My Basket0

Breaches of examination and/or assessment regulations

These matters concern breaches of CII's examination and/or assessment rules. Two candidates were in breach of the CII Code of Ethics & Conduct in force at the time of the breaches. From 2009 the CII Code of Ethics and Conduct was replaced by the CII Code of Ethics. A revised version of the Code of Ethics was launched in April 2014. Breaches are considered against the Code of Ethics which was in force at the time the incident took place other candidates were in breach of the CII Code of Ethics now in force.

Where the Preliminary Screener (cases prior to May 2013), Case Examiner or  Disciplinary Panel has decided to publish details of a disciplinary case ascribed (i.e. where an individual has been named), every care has been taken to identify members/students correctly. Please contact the CII if there is any doubt about the identity of a member/student who may have been the subject of disciplinary proceedings and in relation to whom a report has been published.

The CII wishes to make clear that, unless the case reported indicates otherwise, allegations and findings against members/students do not implicate those members' or students' employers in any way.

Evans Mark Gyau – Best Assurance Company Ltd., Kumasi, Ghana

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the M92 assignment written by another candidate in breach of the in breach of the Mixed Assessment Guidelines & Instructions. The CII case examiner invited the respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 15 April 2020. The Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded for the breaches above (DR 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. (DR 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f); d) Be excluded for a period of 24 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6l); e) Be excluded for a period of 24 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6p); f)             Have the M92 coursework assignment result disallowed. (Reg 12.6k); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the respondent during the period of exclusion, will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6p).

Thomas Jennings - Mansfield, Nottinghamshire

The candidate was found to have breached the CII’s examination admission rules by having a mobile phone during a CF1 examination. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded for the Allegation (Reg 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations or enrolling on any CII of assessments (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (Reg 12.6f); and d) The Respondent’s examination candidature be rescinded, or script or paper or submission be disallowed (reg 12.6k).

Hend Kamel Saad Ahmed El Bakly – Abu Dhabi Islamic Bank PJSC, Bancatakaful Retail Banking Group, Abu Dhabi

The candidate was found to have breached the CII’s examination admission rules by repeatedly attempting to communicate with other candidates during the AWA exam. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6l); e) Have the AWA 2018 examination results withdrawn (Reg 12.6k); and f) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6p).

Khaled Mohammed – Gulf Insurance & Reinsurance Co, Safat, Kuwait

The candidate was found to have breached the CII’s examination admission rules by continuing to write answers in the W02 examination after the end of the allotted time period. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Have the W02 examination results withdrawn (Reg 12.6k).

Wesley Koskey – Heritage Insurance Company, Nairobi, Kenya

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the M05 assignment written by another candidate in breach of the Mixed Assessment Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded for the above breaches (Reg 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Have the M05 coursework assessment disallowed (Reg 12.6k); e) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from 30th April 2019 (Reg 12.6l); f)Be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from 30th April 2019 (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Dharles Kasonda – Insurance Institute of Malawi, Blantyre, Malawi 

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the 530 assignment written by another candidate in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded for the Allegations (Reg 12.6a); b)Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Have the 2017 530 Coursework-Assignment result disallowed (Reg 12.6k); e) Be excluded for a period of 24 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6l); f) Be excluded for a period of 24 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p)

Ahlam Mohamed Al-Hosani – Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the 960 assignment written by another candidate in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Have a record of the matter added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f); and b) Have the 992 Risk Management in Insurance assignment 3 result disallowed (Reg 12.6k).

Nathan Corcoran - JLT Speciality Ltd., 35 Richmond Hill, Bournemouth

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised an AF8 assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 21 November 2019. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR12.6a); b) take and complete the CII online ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f) d) have the AF8 assignment result disallowed; e) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for a period of 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the CII (with effect from 30 Sept. 2019) (Reg 12.6l); f) be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning (with effect from 30 Sept. 2019) (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p). 

Andrew Hill - JLT Wealth Management Ltd., 16 Queensbridge, Northampton

The Respondent allowed his AF8 assignment to be accesses by another candidate, in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 25 October 2019. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; and b) to take and complete the CII online Ethics course before booking any CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or apply for any CII recognition of prior learning; and c) have a record of this matter added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f).

Michael Savage DipPFS of Casterdon Wealth Managment Ltd., Unit 5, The Parade, Church Street, Armthorpe

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have collaborated with another person in completing the AF8 assignment, in breach of the CII Coursework Guidelines 7 Instructions. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 21 November 2019. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR12.6a); b) take and complete the CII online ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f); d) have the AF8 Assignment result disallowed; e) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the CII (with effect from 30 April 2019) (Reg 12.6l); f) be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning (with effect from 30 April 2019) (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Rosa Nash of Old Mill Jackson Ltd., Bishopbrook House, Cathedral Avenue, Wells, Somerset

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the CII Coursework Assessment Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 13 August 2019. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR12.6a); b) take and complete the CII online ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f); d) have the AF8 Assignment result disallowed; e) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the CII (with effect from 1 April 2019) (Reg 12.6l); f) be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning (with effect from 1 April 2019) (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Matthew Clark APFS, of Old Mill Financial Planning, Bishopbrook House, Cathedral Avenue, Wells BA5 1FD

The assessment candidate allowed his coursework assignment to be accesses by another candidate, in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines & Instructions. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 19 June 2019. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR12.6a); b) take and complete the CII online ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f);

Jitanshu Sahni of XChanging C/O Unitech Infospace, IT-ITES SEZ, 6th Fl Tower 3, Netaji Subhash Marg, Sector 48, Gurgaon Haryana 122019, India

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have collaborated with another candidate when completing his M92 Assignment, in breach of the CII Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 28 February 2019. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR12.6a); b) take and complete the CII online ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enroll on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f) d) have the M92 Assignment result disallowed; e) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the CII (with effect from 14 January 2018) (Reg 12.6l); f) be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning (with effect from 14 January 2018) (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Sugam Khanna of GENPACT, C/O Unitech Infospace, IT-ITES SEZ, 6th Fl Tower 3, Netaji Subhash Marg, Sector 48, Gurgaon Haryana 122019, India

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have collaborated with another candidate when completing his M92 Assignment, in breach of the CII Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 28 February 2019. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR12.6a); b) take and complete the CII online ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enroll on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f) d) have the M92 Assignment result disallowed; e) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the CII (with effect from 14 January 2018) (Reg 12.6l); f) be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning (with effect from 14 January 2018) (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Ms Nisha Reeba Thomas - Vadavathoor, Kottayam, Kerala, India

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the M92 Assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the CII Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 20 February 2019. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR12.6a); b) take and complete the CII online ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f) d) have the M92 Assignment result disallowed; e) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 24 months from the examinations or assessments held by the CII (with effect from 1 Oct. 2017) (Reg 12.6l); f) be excluded for a period of 24 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning (with effect from 1 Oct. 2017) (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Timothy John Woodman, T W Wealth Management Ltd., 18 Kings Walk, Holland Road, Maidstone, Kent

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the AF5 Coursework assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the CII Coursework Assessment Guidelines and Instructions. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 14 September 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; b) take and complete the CII on line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d); c) had the coursework assignment result disallowed; d) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute (with effect from 1 July 2017) (Reg 12.6l); e) be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning (with effect from 1 July 2017) (Reg 12.6p); and f) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p). 

Neil John Ridpath, Neil J Ridpath Wealth Management Ltd., 123 Main Street, Frodsham

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the AF5 Coursework assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the CII Coursework Assessment Guidelines and Instructions. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 4 September 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; b) take and complete the CII on line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d); c) had the coursework assignment result disallowed; d) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 21 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6l); e) be excluded for a period of 21 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6p); and f) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p). 

Paul Anthony Padden, Ashbourne, Derbyshire 

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have collaborated with another candidate when completing his AF5 coursework assignment, in breach of the CII Coursework Assessment Guidelines and Instructions. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 26 April 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; b) take and complete the CII on line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d); c) had the coursework assignment result disallowed; d) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 20 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6l); e) be excluded for a period of 20 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6p); and f) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p). 

Julian Wall, St James Place Wealth Management, Embankment House, Nottingham 

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have collaborated with another candidate when completing his AF5 coursework assignment, in breach of the CII Coursework Assessment Guidelines and Instructions. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 24 April 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; b) take and complete the CII on line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d); c) had the coursework assignment result disallowed; d) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6l); e) be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6p); and f) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p). 

Anand Ganesan, ICICI Lombard GIC Ltd, Mumbai, India 

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised another candidate's M92 Mixed Assessment Coursework assignment and collaborated with another candidate when completing his M92 Mixed Assessment Coursework assignment, in breach of the Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 23 August 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; b) take and complete the CII on line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning. To be completed within 6 months of the date of the order (Reg 12.6d). c) had the coursework result disallowed; d) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 24 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6l). e) be excluded for a period of 24 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6p). f) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

William Vernon, Lockton, Houndsditch, London

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a M05 mixed assessment coursework assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order ("Order") under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 10 August 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR 12.6a); b) take and complete the CII on line ethics course before attempting to book any further CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments, apply for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) have the M05 Mixed Assessment coursework assignment result disallowed (Reg 12.6); d) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months (with effect from 13 August 2017) (Reg 12.6l); e) be excluded from applying for CII recognition of prior learning for 18 months (with effect from 13 August 2017) (Reg 12.6p); and f) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p). 

Stephen Huckle, Autonetic Insurance & Pensions Services, Mansfield, Notts.

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a M05 Mixed Assessment coursework assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order ("Order") under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 4 September 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR 12.6a); b) have the M05 Mixed Assessment coursework assignment result disallowed (Reg 12.6); c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months (with effect from 1 July 2017) (Reg 12.6l); d) be excluded from applying for CII recognition of prior learning for 18 months (with effect from 1 July 2017) (Reg 12.6p); e) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p); and f) 1.2 Within 6 months of the Order, take and complete the CII on line ethics course before attempting to book any further CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments, apply for any CII recognition of prior learning or renewing your membership. (Reg 12.6d) 

Ahlam Mohammed Al Hosani of ADNOC, Abu Dhabi, UAE

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised another candidate’s 992 Risk Management in Insurance Assignment 3, in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines and Instructions. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 13 August 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR 12.6a); b) have the 992 coursework assessment assignment result disallowed (Reg 12.6); c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 24 months (with effect from 1 January 2018) (Reg 12.6l) and would have to take the CII online ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to re-join as a member of the CII (Reg 12.6d); and d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 24 months’ period of exclusion (Reg 12.6p). 

Philip Nicholson of Lockton, Houndsditch, London

The assessment candidate allowed his coursework assignment to be accesses by another candidate, in breach of the Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 13 July 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; and b) be required to take and complete the CII online Ethics course before renewing membership, booking any CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or apply for any CII recognition of prior learning. 

Melanie Jackson of Autonetic Insurance & Pensions Services, Mansfield, Notts.

The assessment candidate allowed their assignment to be accesses by another candidate, in breach of the Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 13 June 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; and b) be required to take and complete the CII online Ethics course before booking any CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or apply for any CII recognition of prior learning.   

 

Matthew Curzon, of Curzon Wealth Management, 4 Commercial Street, Ogmore Vale, Bridgend, Mid Glamorgan

The assessment candidate allowed his assignment to be accesses by another candidate, in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines and Instructions. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 6 April 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; and b) be required to take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before booking any CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or apply for any CII recognition of prior learning.

Huda Fahad Alharbi, Marsh & NcLennan, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a 960 coursework assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 20 February 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR 12.6a); b) have the 960 coursework assessment assignments 1, 2 and 3 results disallowed (Reg 12.6); c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 21 months (with effect from 8 September 2017) (Reg 12.6l) and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII (Reg 12.6d); and d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 21 months’ period of exclusion (Reg 12.6p).

Ali Akbar, Nanakwara, Karachi, Pakistan

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a M05 coursework assessment assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 20 February 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR 12.6a); b) had his assignment result disallowed (Reg 12.6); c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 27 months (with effect from 7 November 2016) (Reg 12.6l) and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII (Reg 12.6d); d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 27 month period of exclusion (Reg 12.6p).

Sheriff Abudu – Accra, Ghana

The assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised content from websites for his coursework assignments for Units 530 and 990 in breach of the Coursework Assessment Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013. Since the Respondent did not to do so within a reasonable period of time, the Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1(b). The following sanctions were imposed on the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b)  Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before attempting to apply to book any further CII examinations, enrol on any assessments, apply for any CII recognition of prior learning or apply for membership of the CII (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Have the 530 and 990 assignment results disallowed (Reg 12.6k); e) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from 1st July 2017 (Reg 12.6l); f) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from 1st July 2017 (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Lonna Baah – Be Wiser Insurance Services Ltd., Andover, Hampshire

The assessment candidate was found to have given access to and collaborated with other candidates on the P05 continuous assessment assignment and plagiarised the P05 continuous assessment assignment of another candidate. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013. The Respondent failed to respond and the Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1(b). The following sanctions were imposed on the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b)  Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before attempting to book any further CII examinations or assessments, apply for any CII recognition of prior learning or submitting an application to join the CII (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Have the P05 examination result and continuous assessment result disallowed (Reg 12.6k); e) Be excluded for a period of 24 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from 1st January 2017 (Reg 12.6l); f) Be excluded for a period of 24 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from 1st January 2017 (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Holly Ruddick – Be Wiser Insurance Services Ltd., Andover, Hampshire

The assessment candidate admitted to having given access to and collaborated with other candidates on the P05 continuous assessment assignment and plagiarised the P05 continuous assessment assignment of another candidate. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013. The Respondent failed to respond and the Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1(b). The following sanctions were imposed on the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b)  Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before attempting to book any further CII examinations, enrol on any assessments or apply for any CII recognition of prior learning or CII membership (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (Reg 12.6f); d) Have the P05 continuous assessment result disallowed (Reg 12.6k); e) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from 1st January 2017 (Reg 12.6l); f) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from 1st January 2017 (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Laura Howard – Be Wiser Insurance Services Ltd., Andover, Hampshire

The assessment candidate admitted to having collaborated with other candidates on the P05 continuous assessment assignment and plagiarised the P05 continuous assessment assignment of another candidate. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013. The Respondent failed to respond and the Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1(b). The following sanctions were imposed on the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before attempting to book any further CII examinations or assessments, apply for any CII recognition of prior learning or submitting an application to join the CII (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Have the P05 examination result and continuous assessment result disallowed (Reg 12.6k); e) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from 1st January 2017 (Reg 12.6l); f) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from 1st January 2017 (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Rachel Thompson – Be Wiser Insurance Services Ltd., Andover, Hampshire

The assessment candidate admitted to having plagiarised the P05 continuous assessment assignment of another candidate. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013. The Respondent failed to respond and the Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1(b). The following sanctions were imposed on the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before attempting to book any further CII examinations or assessments, apply for any CII recognition of prior learning or submitting an application to join the CII (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Have the P05 examination result and continuous assessment result disallowed (Reg 12.6k); e) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from 1st January 2017 (Reg 12.6l); f) Be excluded for a period of 18 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from 1st January 2017 (Reg 12.6p); and g) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p).

Dr Deepthy Velayudhan, Dubai Insurance Co., Dubai, UAE

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have collaborated with another candidate when completing the 530 Coursework assignment, in breach of the Coursework Assessment Candidate Guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 16 January 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; b) had the coursework result disallowed; c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII; d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. 

Simon Blackburn, Wandle Bank, Wimbledon, London 

The assessment candidate allowed his M92 Coursework Assessment assignment to be accesses by another candidate, in breach of the Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 5 January 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; and b) be required to take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before attempting to book any CII examinations, enrol on any CII assessments or apply for any CII recognition of prior learning or within 6 months from the date of this order (whichever is soonest).      

Khaled Farag Mohamed, Arab Misr Insurance Group, Cairo, Egypt

The candidate was found to have collaborated with another candidate when completing his M80 Mixed Assessment Coursework assignment, in breach of the mixed assessment candidate guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 5 January 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had his assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. 

Nagwa Ibrahim Mahmoud, Arab Misr Insurance Group, Cairo, Egypt

The candidate was found to have collaborated with another candidate when completing his M80 Mixed Assessment Coursework assignment, in breach of the mixed assessment candidate guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 5 January 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had her assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. 

Mohamed Hamdy Abd El Moaty, Arab Misr Insurance Group, Cairo, Egypt

The candidate was found to have collaborated with another candidate when completing his M80 Mixed Assessment Coursework assignment, in breach of the mixed assessment candidate guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 5 January 2018. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had his assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. 

Kevin Robins, Merthyr Tydfil, UK

The candidate was found to have plagiarised another candidate's assignment, in breach of the continuous assessment student guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 12 December 2017. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had his assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. 

Lauren Leyland, AXA Insurance, AXA House, 4 Parklands, Lostock, Bolton

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a M92 Mixed Assessment Coursework assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the Mixed Assessment Candidate Guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which was signed on 22 November 2017. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had her assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months (with effect from 1 April 2017) and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. 

Cian O'Brien, Grange Grove, London, UK

The mixed assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised an M92 assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment student guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 20 March 2017.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had his assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. 

Mohamed Husain formerly ACII, Misr Insurance Company, 7 Abdel Latif Boltia Street, Garden City, Cairo, Egypt

As Mr Husain declined to sign a Consensual Order with the CII, the complaint was referred to a Disciplinary Panel hearing which took place on 26 and 27 September and 17 November 2016. The Disciplinary Panel unanimously upheld the complaint against the Respondent and found that, on the balance of probabilities, he had plagiarised case studies, produced by another Fellowship applicant, as part of his Fellowship application and had submitted the plagiarised case studies without the other applicant's consent.

The Panel ordered that the Respondent a) be reprimanded, b) be excluded from CII examinations, assessments, submitting Fellowship applications and applying for recognition of prior learning for 2 years and 6 months c)  be required to take the CII on-line ethics course before attempting any CII exams, assessments, submitting Fellowship applications or applying for recognition of prior learning in the future, d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 2 years and 6 months e) be ineligible for membership for 2 years and 6 months and f) be required to submit any future application for membership to the CII Membership Application Sub-Committee for scrutiny.

Kalpesh Patel Dip PFS, Berkeley Burke and Co Ltd, Regents Street, Leicester, UK

The exam candidate had taken unauthorised tax tables into an examination which was in breach of the Examinations Admission Rules.  The CII Case Examiner had invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 3 March 2017.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded and b) take the CII on-line ethics course before attempting any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in the future. It was noted that although there had been a breach of the examination regulations, there was no evidence that the candidate had tried to gain an advantage in taking the exam.

Mark Campbell Cert PFS, Aspen Insurance UK Limited, 30 Fenchurch Street, London UK

The exam candidate had taken his mobile phone into an examination which was in breach of the Examinations Admission Rules.  The CII Case Examiner had invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 27 January 2017.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded for each of the breaches and b) take the CII on-line ethics course before attempting any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in the future. 

Natalie Cain, AEG Aegon Limited, Serco, Ribble House, Ballam Road, Lytham, UK

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have collaborated with another  P62 candidate when completing an assignment and sharing feedback on her assignment with another candidate and a third party, in breach of the continuous assessment student guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 10 January 2017.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had her assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 24 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 24 month period of exclusion.

Jennifer Lord, AEG Aegon Limited, Serco, Ribble House, Ballam Road, Lytham, UK

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have collaborated with another  P62 candidate when completing an assignment and sharing feedback on her assignment with another candidate and a third party, in breach of the continuous assessment student guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 10 January 2017.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had her assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 24 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 24 month period of exclusion.

Ashmal Kahn Dip PFS, AK Advisory Ltd, Cambrai Court, 1229 Stratford Road, Birmingham, UK

The exam candidate had papers underneath his desk and a mobile phone on his desk during an AF3 examination which was in breach of the CII Examination Admission Rules.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 5 January 2017.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) be required to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments, before applying for recognition of prior learning in future or before applying for membership of the CII c) had his examination result withdrawn.

Nyasha Chirau, Be Wiser Insurance, Winchester House, Winchester House, Andover, UK

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a P05 assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment student guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 14 December 2016.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had his assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Matthew Galloway, Be Wiser Insurance, Barrett House, Savoy Close, Andover, UK

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a P05 assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment student guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 14 December 2016.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had his assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Adewunmi Solabi  Scib Nigeria & Co. Ltd, 66 Adeniran Ogunsanya Street, Surulere, Lagos, Nigeria

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised an 820 assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the coursework assessment student guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 1 July 2016.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had his assignment result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Puja Kapoor, Marsh Emirates Insurance Brokers, Al Gurg Tower 3, Riggat Al Buteen, Baniyas Road, Deira PO BOx 64057, Dubai, UAE

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a P50 assignment written by another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment student guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 29 June 2016.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had her continuous assignment result and examination result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 20 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 20 month period of exclusion. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Zahid Latif, Amana Cooperative Insurance, PO Box 27986, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia         

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the P92 assignments written by another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment student guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 22 June 2016.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded b) had his continuous assignment result and examination result disallowed c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying to renew membership of the CII d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Mark Trossell CertCII, Luker Rowe, Century House, London Road, Amersham HP7 0TU

The assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the M92 mixed assessment assignment written by another candidate in breach of the mixed assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 18 May 2016. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded, b) had his mixed assessment assignment result disallowed, c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for any examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of exclusion.  The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Elizabeth Adama, Accra, Ghana

The assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised P85 continuous assessment assignments written by another candidate in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 22 April 2016. The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded, b) had her continuous assignment result disallowed, c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 24 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for any examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 24 month period of exclusion.

Stanley Wallace Dip CII, Metropolitan Insurance Company, Capital Place, 11 Patrice Lumumba Road, Airport Residential Area, PO Box GP20084, Accra, Ghana

The assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the 930 continuous assessment assignments written by another candidate and to have provided his 530 continuous assessment assignments to another candidate in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 3 March 2016.  The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) his 930 continuous assessment assignment result and examination result were disallowed, c) he was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future, d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 18 months. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Ernestina Okrah, Metropolitan Insurance Company, Harper Road, Adum, PO Box 1481, Kumasi, Ghana

The assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the 530 continuous assessment assignments written by other candidates and in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 24 February 2016. The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) her continuous assessment assignment result disallowed, c) she was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future, d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 18 months. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Alex Kyerematen Cert CII, Metropolitan Insurance Company, Capital Place, 11 Patrice Lumumba Road, Airport Residential Area, PO Box GP20084, Accra, Ghana

The assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a 530 continuous assessment assignment written by another candidate and to have provided another 530 continuous assessment assignment written by him to another candidate in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 22 February 2016. The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) his continuous assignment result and  examination result were disallowed, c) he was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 18 months. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Patience Abrahams ACII, KEK Insurance Brokers (Africa)Ltd, PO Box AN 6681, Accra-North, Ghana

The assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised P85 continuous assessment assignments written by another candidate in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 15 February 2016. The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) her continuous assignment result was disallowed, c) she was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 18 months e) the Respondent was excluded from enrolling on the CII Fellowship programme and/or applying to become a Fellow of the CII for 18 months f) the Respondent was excluded from applying for Chartered Status for 18 months. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c), d), e) and f) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Muhammad Imran, IGI Insurance Limited, Syed Maratib Ali Road, Gulberg, Lahore, Pakistan

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised 820 assignments written by another continuous assessment candidate . The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 27 January 2016. The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) his continuous assessment assignment and examination result were disallowed, c) he was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 2 years and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 2 years.

Imran Muhammad Aslam, IGI Insurance Limited, Syed Maratib Ali Road, Gulberg, Lahore, Pakistan

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised 820 assignments written by another continuous assessment candidate. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 27 January 2016. The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) his continuous assessment assignment and examination result were disallowed, c) he was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 2 years and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 2 years.

Anita Mensah, Metropolitan Insurance Co Ltd, PO Box 20084, Accra, Ghana                

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have obtained unauthorised access to an 820 assignment written by another continuous assessment candidate which she then plagiarised. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 18 December 2015. The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) her continuous assessment assignment and examination result were disallowed, c) she was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 2 years and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 2 years. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years and 6 months in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge. 

Michael Platt, The Platt Partnership Ltd, 21 Chester Street, Mold, CH7 1EG

The assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised a J09 coursework assessment assignment written by another candidate in breach of the coursework assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 25 November 2015. The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) his coursework assignment result was disallowed, c) he was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future d) no examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion would be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for 18 months. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Emma Butcher ACII, Chartered Insurance Broker, Hettle Andrews, Eleven Brindleyplace, 2 Brunswick Square, Brindleyplace, Birmingham, UK

The respondent was found to have provided an M92  mixed assessment assignment written by one candidate to another candidate, in breach of the CII Code of Ethics.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 7 October 2015.  The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course.

Ross McKee Cert CII, Hettle Andrews, Eleven Brindleyplace, 2 Brunswick Square, Brindleyplace, Birmingham, UK

The mixed assessment candidate was found to have given their M92 assignment to another candidate, in breach of the mixed assessment guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 7 October 2015.  The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course.

Unascribed case

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have given their completed 530 assignments to another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 5 August 2015. The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course. In line with earlier precedent the Case Examiner decided not to publish the Respondent's name due to the relatively recent introduction and publication of warnings not to provide assignments to other candidates at the time the candidate enrolled on the continuous assessment course.

Unascribed case

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have given their completed P05 assignments to another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 3 August 2015. The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course. In line with earlier precedent the Case Examiner decided not to publish the Respondent's name due to the relatively recent introduction and publication of warnings not to provide assignments to other candidates at the time the candidate enrolled on the continuous assessment course.

Unascribed case

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have given their completed 960 assignments to another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 30 July 2015. The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course. In line with earlier precedent the Case Examiner decided not to publish the Respondent's name due to the relatively recent introduction and publication of warnings not to provide assignments to other candidates at the time the candidate enrolled on the continuous assessment course.

Oliwia Litewnicka Dip CII, Guy Carpenter and Company Limited, Tower Place West, London, UK

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have given their P97 assignment to another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 27 July 2015.  The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course.

Unascribed case

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have given their completed J09 assignment to other candidates, in breach of the coursework assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 3 July 2015. The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course. In line with earlier precedent the Case Examiner decided not to publish the Respondent's name due to the relatively recent introduction and publication of warnings not to provide assignments to other candidates.

Victoria Bates Dip CII, Clear Insurance Management Limited, 1 Great Tower Street, London, UK

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have given their P81 assignment to another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 23 June 2015. The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course.

Marie-Antoinette Haasbroek Cert CII, T H March Insurance Brokers Limited,10-12 Ely Place, London, UK

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have given their completed P05 assignments to another candidate, in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 3 June 2015. The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course.

Unascribed case

The continuous assessment candidate was found to have given their completed P05 assignments to other candidates, in breach of the continuous assessment guidelines. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 22 May 2015. The Respondent was reprimanded and required to complete the CII on-line ethics course. In line with earlier precedent the Case Examiner decided not to publish the Respondent's name due to the relatively recent introduction and publication of warnings not to provide assignments to other candidates.

James Harrison Cert CII, Clapham, London, SW4, UK

The coursework assessment candidate was found to have plagiarised the assignments of another coursework assessment candidate. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 5 February 2014. The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) his coursework assessment assignments were disallowed, c) he was excluded from CII examinations for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams. The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence c) from 2 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Mr Amjid Mahmood, Jubilee General Insurance Company, Lahore, Pakistan

The examination candidate was found to have copied the script of another examination candidate during a CII examination.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013,  to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 2 August 2013.  The sanctions issued were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) his examination script was disallowed, c) he was excluded from CII examinations for two years and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking further CII exams d) declared ineligible for membership for two years.  The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of offences c) and d) from 3 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

Miss Imogen Bland Dip CII of Willis Ltd, London, UK

The Appellant appealed a decision of a Disciplinary Panel dated 30 January 2013, previously holding that she had been in breach of the CII Coursework Assessment Guidelines and Instructions, the CII's Code of Ethics paragraphs 2.1 and 2.3 ("Charge 1") and paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of the Code of Ethics ("Charge 2").  The Appellant had been found to have submitted plagiarised assignments to the CII as part of her Unit 990 Coursework submissions and had been dishonest in her responses to the CII's Investigative Team.

The Appellant served a notice of appeal on the single ground that the sanction imposed by the Disciplinary Panel, was too severe; noting that the removal of her ACII designation, by rescission of the examinations she had taken to achieve the qualification, meant that she would have to complete further examinations to qualify as ACII once her exclusion period had passed.  She also submitted that publication of the outcome of the case would result in adverse publicity not only to her but to her employer.

The appeal was heard on 24 April 2013 and reconvened on 10 July 2013.

Save for upholding the appeal to the extent that erasure of her past examination and coursework passes since 19 January 2012 was excessive, the Appeal Panel determined that the sanction imposed by the Disciplinary Panel be upheld and in light of the seriousness of the offence, the Appeal Panel ordered the Appellant be reprimanded, undertake the CII's Ethics on-line course, her employer be informed, the Appellant's Units 990 and 930 Coursework results be disallowed, (the latter resulting in the Appellant's ACII designation being rescinded and replaced by Dip CII) and that the Appellant be excluded from CII examinations for a period of 1 year for Charge 1 and 2 years for Charge 2.  The Appeal Panel ordered that the sanctions were to run concurrently.  The Appeal Panel also determined that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate any exceptional circumstances that should cause the Panel to refrain from ordering publication.

Mr David McMorrow formerly employed by - St James's Place Partnership, London, UK

At a Disciplinary hearing on 21 March 2013, a Disciplinary Panel unanimously upheld the complaints against the Respondent Mr David McMorrow and found that on the balance of probabilities, he had obtained a copy of an early version of the marking scheme for the J03 April 2011 examinations, had used this to answer his J03 examination in April 2011 to obtain a higher mark in his exam and that he was therefore in breach of various provisions of the Code of Conduct. 

In light of the seriousness of the offences, the Panel ordered that the Respondent be reprimanded; be ineligible to take CII examinations for a period of 3 years, his membership of the CII be suspended for a period of 3 years with immediate effect and that this decision be published in CII publications. The sanctions were ordered to run concurrently. 

Mr Tom Baird of Unum, Bristol, UK

The examination candidate was found in possession of unauthorised materials in an examination. The CII Preliminary Screener made a determination, endorsed by the Disciplinary Committee under Rule 9 of the Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2010, that as the materials did notcontain any information relating to the exam that the candidate had not intended to gain an advantage. The candidate was reprimanded consequently for a technical breach of the examination regulations.

Ms Yu Gu (also known as Ms Gu Yu) of Royal Sun Alliance, Shanghai, PR China

The examination candidate was found to have inadvertently taken unauthorised materials into an examination. The CII Preliminary Screener made a determination, endorsed by the Disciplinary Committee under Rule 9 of the Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2010, that there was no evidence that the exam candidate had intended to gain an advantage. The candidate was reprimanded consequently for a technical breach of the examination regulations.

Mr Mathew Bekker, Mulbarton, Norwich / Mr Adam Geddes of Paul Geddes Wealth Management ltd, Willoughby Waterleys, Leicestershire, UK

The examination candidates were found to have taken unauthorised material into a CII examination. In both instances, the candidates were found in possession of externally produced tax tables. As the CII provides tax tables for these exams, and no handwritten notes were found on the documents, the CII Preliminary Screener made a determination, endorsed by the Disciplinary Committee under Rule 9 of the Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2010, that there was no intention to gain an advantage. The candidates were reprimanded consequently for a technical breach of the examination regulations.

Unascribed Case

Disciplinary Hearing date 15 June 2011 - "Disciplinary action may be taken against any candidate found guilty of dishonourable or unprofessional conduct or committing a breach of the exam regulations". The Respondent sat examination Unit RO6 - Financial Planning Practice in October 2010 and passed with very high marks. Following a CII investigation it was asserted that the answers to the Respondent's script were conspicuously similar to those of the marking scheme for the RO6 examination. The Senior Examiner was employed by the same company and shared the same office. The Panel considered the evidence supporting a charge of the Respondent having obtained a copy of the RO6 marking scheme for the purposes of achieving an inflated mark. By a majority decision the Panel held the CII Prosecution's evidence to be insufficient to support the allegation. The Respondent's employer had been advised of the Panel's decision. The case was dismissed.

Miss Donna Cox of Willis Limited, Friars Street, Ipswich, Suffolk, UK

Disciplinary Hearing date 16 September 2009 - Miss Donna Cox falsified her CII April 2009 examination results to her employer for the P01 and P05 examinations. The Panel ordered that the Member be reprimanded and expelled from membership and from taking CII exams for 10 year

alt