Search results

The paper utilises formality-informality modelling to examine occupational change, using commercial service charge management as its case study.

This is a conceptual paper that develops a typology for applying formalisation to occupational change and then utilises historiography to generate a narrative on the evolution of service charge management.

Formality is seen as a method of improving transparency and performance as a “modern” response to a range complaints about professional performance. Whilst real improvement failed to develop, a “snowball” of continued formalisation remained the perceived solution, leading to centralisation of measures of professional performance.

The work is a conceptual paper that develops a historiography on the development of service charge administrative practice. Whilst it relies on objective data and secondary literature, the narrative that is developed is subjective and interpretive.

The conceptual nature of the work offers potential insights into occupational organisation. It suggests that formalising procedures in itself does not improve performance.

The paper provides a snapshot analysis on the state of service charge management at the point in which its regulatory framework by RICS changed from a voluntary code of practice to a mandatory professional statement.

The data consist of a unique eight-year longitudinal study of service charge statements and practice (2010–2017). Because of the confidential nature of such business-sensitive information, this is a priceless study of real-world practice over such a long period and is able to illustrate both annual compliance and the year-on-year changes. Given this, it is recognised that data are skewed in favour of compliance because they are derived from an actively managed portfolio.

The results continue to illustrate long-running problems of non-compliance with “required” metrics. Given the inherent bias in the data, this is especially difficult to excuse. The paper also analyses the results in the light of the new RICS professional statement, which requires mandatory compliance. Whilst some of the metrics are advisory, there remain questions over how RICS might realistically enforce so many practitioners to change their existing performance and how willing the institution might be to actually prosecute failure. It also revisits the issue of institutionalised benchmarking of standards. Intriguingly, there are islands of almost perfect compliance, which offers an interesting contrast and raises further research questions on why some practitioners provide such exemplary work.

The data are derived from the clients of a UK property management consultancy. This does preclude any randomness to the sampling. However, the richness of the data and the methodology adopted provide valid data.

This work offers both unique data and an eight-year longitudinal analysis, but also a timely comparison with the requirements within a new RICS professional statement. This shift in regulatory regime reinforces the value of the work.

The relationship between the owner and an occupier of a commercial property is determined by the lease, inasmuch as it sets out the legally enforceable duties and obligations of each party. However, it is only that, a legal framework; it is not a practical management handbook on how best to operate the premises and generate an amicable business relationship. The purpose of this paper is to consider the role of the lease in reinforcing and disrupting the generation of best practice within real estate management.

The paper examines actual leases to understand the service charge and how data pertinent to it is collected, disseminated and interpreted by both parties in carrying out their activities within and about the property. This is then benchmarked against provisions of the Service Charge Code of Practice.

Despite a number of incarnations of a code of practice on service charges during the lifetime of the leases examined, the research finds a troublingly small uptake of its ideas within new leases.

The findings predict future problems in the practical management of multi-tenanted properties, coupled with a call that leases are written to the Code’s requirements.

No such lease examination has been undertaken to date.

This paper is concerned with International Accounting Standards (IAS) and their impact upon existing accounting practices for property within the UK. It also anticipates the wider international and European demands for IAS. There are two primary points to consider. First, the European Union (EU) has stated that it expects publicly listed companies quoted on the stock exchanges of EU member states to adopt International Accounting Standards by 2005. Others are encouraged to do so, with an implication that this will become mandatory at some future date. In earlier papers, the authors examined the recent changes within property accounting and the role played by property professionals within that process. This paper examines the requirements of international standards within the context of the British position as explained earlier. Differences are noted, the contrasting debates analysed and suggestions offered for corporate real estate professionals to consider. Secondly, unlike British Accounting Standards, IAS do not recognise property professionals or any professional organisation representing them, such as the International Valuation Standards Committee (IVSC), and none of their regulations are represented within the standards. This situation is examined, and commentary provided upon the repercussions and possible solutions.

This paper is concerned with accounting for leasehold property. While property professionals are familiar with commercial and technical aspects of leases, recent proposals offer serious implications beyond the notional historical reporting of an entity’s financial position. Current proposals issued by the ASB will markedly impact upon the financial position reported by businesses holding leasehold properties, with consequent effects upon their reported profitability and their ability to raise finance. This paper examines the current position, whereby leases are regarded as either a finance or an operating lease. It then examines the conceptual framework in which accountants view the existing lease reporting provisions, examining the unease the current provisions cause. Finally, it discusses the most recent proposals and offers a commentary upon responses to them. It concludes with a warning to the owners and users of leasehold property to be ready for change ‐ or to make their voices known.

The paper proposes to outline the rules, regulations and generally accepted accounting principles that must be followed when recognising and valuing property in UK financial statements. Its aim is to give the professional surveyor or corporate real estate adviser a clear understanding of the underlying principles involved and also the rules and conventions that must be followed. A plethora of new regulations has led to a range of new practices that must be understood by those advising upon corporate property matters. Not least of the reasons are the direct effects property matters now have upon balance sheets and profit and loss accounts. The aim of this paper is to offer corporate real estate managers an overview of the accounting framework in which they must offer advice to businesses. Traditionally, non‐property companies have tended to relegate property matters to advisers, who found themselves excluded from the key strategic decision‐making processes of the company, despite the large amounts of capital frequently tied up in their premises. The rise of facilities management and new forms of serviced office structure began to increase awareness of the issue. However, recent changes to accounting standards by the Accounting Standards Board (ASB) will impact directly upon the balance sheet and profit and loss account. In short, property issues directly impinge upon a business’s ability to report profits. Even so, relatively few property‐related views were put forward as part of the consultation process in the creation of these new standards. The area that has achieved most notice recently has been desire for accurate and consistent valuation and depreciation of assets ‐ including the management and maintenance of properties, and the selection of the property valuer. The basic premise behind such changes was to make accounts more visible and to demand clear logic and rationality of sensible business decisions. The paper deals solely with firms operating as manufacturers or service providers, with no interest in their property except as a place to do business, and an asset held as part of that business. Neither investment properties nor leased properties are discussed here, for reasons of space.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the issue of compliance with a voluntary professional Code of Practice. It aims to take service charge management as its subject and it also to discuss how current notions of “best practice” have evolved in order to explain the poor performance uncovered. From this it seeks to derive an alternative perspective and develop a new framework for managing agents to consider utilising in order to advance the generalised principles within the existing RICS Code of Practice, Service Charges in Commercial Property.

The paper applies an inductive reasoning by applying best practice from other disciplines (the specific) to commercial property (hence arguing for their adoption to the general). It utilises a critical review of the secondary literature on the wider aspects of best practice and original data on commercial service charge management to devise an ideal type framework for accounting for service charge moneys.

It provides an idealised conceptual framework for managing agents to consider applying to their management of the service charge process, specifically with regard to accounting issues therein. The paper is not proposing a definitive adoption of accruals accounting, but provides an analysis of the potential advantages – and problems. The intention of this work is to drive consultation for better practice, rather than provide a de facto template for adoption.

The work relies on data previously generated by the authors, and produces an original template and example for the practitioner. The work's primary value is that it proposes an innovative approach to the occupation of the commercial service charge manager. Within this, it also offers advice to the wider profession on how to better regulate the discipline. While the proposed approach offers advantages over the existing best practice paradigm, it generates its own conceptual problems that will need to be considered by professionals.

The paper benchmarks compliance for 2010‐2011 with the RICS Code of Practice for Commercial Service Charges 2006.

Whether the proxy adopted is measured by floorspace or number of commercial office buildings, the sample size conforms to Kreycie and Morgan's determination for representative sample size. Data are generated directly from the original documents provided to commercial leaseholders to ensure authenticity and remove the need for third party reporting of said data. This guarantees the data are valid.

The research discovers that compliance with the RICS Code of Practice for commercial service charges is poorly, if variably, implemented. This contrasts with claims by the professional body.

The work only concerns 17 corporate tenants operating principally in the financial services sector and data are drawn from the clients of one property services company. Content analysis is utilised in order to interpret the data and requires some subjective judgement by the researchers. The work only refers to multi‐let office space in England and Wales.

Data are original and the paper offers a unique benchmarking test. This contrasts markedly with the anecdotal evidence offered by the profession in defending their standards of practice and whilst the paper has limitations, it is the largest and most accurate study yet carried out in the field.

The paper examines how accounting practice changes, which forces generate change, and the role of a best practice benchmark within this. It examines this process of change within service charge accounting in commercial property. The purpose of this paper is to establish that “best” practice is of a low standard and poorly implemented, and then explain this.

Data are hand‐collected from the original accounting source documents that are routinely provided to commercial leaseholders as part of the service charge management and accountability process. Evidence is generated by directly examining actual service charge budgets and periodic certificates of expenditure incurred to reduce bias, create complete data and ensure authenticity. The findings are then fleshed out and reinterpreted by utilising models created using Laughlin's middle‐range thinking methodology.

“Best” practice is neither onerous nor “best” when compared with normal accounting practices in other occupations. Whilst the 2006 Code of Practice has improved service charge management, the majority of certificates do not conform to best practice. This suggests that “best” practice is rather less a statement of current good practice and rather more an idealised view of the industry enacted due to wider issues, such as tenant resentment attracting government interest, ideas diffusing into the sector from elsewhere or a profession seeking to improve its occupational control.

The sample of service charge budgets and certificates used in this work represents approximately 6.2 per cent of the total estimated multi‐let office space in England and Wales and covers the period 1998‐2009, with the majority of the buildings being tenanted by organisations within the financial services sector. Content analysis is utilised in order to interpret the data and to test actual practice with that required in the Code of Practice. In certain instances such analysis requires some subjective judgement and interpretation by the researchers.

Data are original and the paper offers a unique benchmarking test. The area of service charge management is unpublished and offers an interesting contrast to the better studied regions of the profession. By shedding light into this backwater, it provides the opportunity for academics and professionals to engage in a discourse that will improve practice, perhaps opening up the discipline to new and better practices. It also illuminates the previously technical literature on the concept of best practice with an original conceptual framework in which to review the construct.

The paper aims to examine how to create a sinking fund, the legalities of its creation and ownership, taxation issues and the accounting treatment of tenant contributions towards sinking funds within service charges demands in the UK office sector.

The paper reviews the prescriptive guidance that the 2007 RICS Code of Practice makes in terms of the creation and operation of such funds, and concludes within an empirical investigation of industry practice on sinking funds from 2004‐2008.

The paper reports whether the Code has improved practice, disclosure, communication and transparency in terms of such funds and speculates on how a future Code might further improve on existing management.

The data are original, and findings conclusively prove the need for enforcement of the existing Code, and necessary revisions as well.