QC behind explosive governance review reveals why it was delayed

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) made it 鈥渁s difficult as possible鈥� for people to contact the independent review into the body鈥檚 dismissal of four non-executive directors from its governing council, its author has said.

Alison Levitt QC, who led the review 鈥� the findings of which were published last week 鈥� said that the 鈥淩ICS management and others on occasion鈥� gave an 鈥渋mpression of reluctant acquiescence鈥� from an early stage in her investigations.

The findings of the review, which was ordered by the RICS following a backlash among members against its treatment of the non-executives, has led to the resignations of four of its senior team.

Alison-Levitt-QC-614x358

Alison Levitt QC said she had already started writing her report when it was 鈥榗ompletely changed鈥� by the last-minute disclosure of more than 400 documents

The non-executives 鈥� Amarjit Atkar, Simon Hardwick, Bruce McAra and Steve Williams 鈥� were ousted in November 2019 after refusing to accept the findings of an internal review into the handling of a critical financial report.

Chief executive Sean Tompkins, president Kathleen Fontana, governing council chair Chris Brookes and management board chair Paul Marcuse have all stepped down following the publication of Levitt鈥檚 report.

The RICS confirmed that Tompkins will not receive a 拢190,000 bonus next year following his resignation. The payment was part of 拢260,000 awarded his year despite the institution furloughing staff and making others redundant during the pandemic.

> Also read: RICS governance scandal: Coverage all in one place

The review鈥檚 findings have sent shockwaves through the membership of the 153-year old institution. They revealed that the RICS gave an 鈥渋naccurate and misleading鈥� statement to The Sunday Times, which first reported that the non-executives had gone, saying that the body鈥檚 governing council had been 鈥渒ept informed鈥� of events leading up to the ousting of the four non-executives. Levitt said that the governing council had not been told anything meaningful until after the non-executives had been dismissed.

She also said that while a separate internal review into the future purpose of the RICS, chaired by Tompkins and Fontana, appeared prominently on the landing page of the RICS鈥� website, the indepdendent review was 鈥渆normously difficult to find鈥�.

It was never given equal prominence to the future purpose review. Levitt added that the RICS 鈥渄ragged its feet鈥� when asked to update revised terms of reference for the independent review, only doing so 鈥渁fter much prompting鈥� when she was already halfway through the investigation.

Law firm Fieldfisher, which carried out the bulk of the internal review into the handling of the financial report, also came in for significant criticism by Levitt. She said that, from the outset, the firm had taken a 鈥減artisan approach鈥�, siding with the RICS executive team 鈥渨ithout an objective analysis of the true merits of the situation鈥�.

Levitt added that Fieldfisher had multiple conflicts of interest which they 鈥渁ppear either to have ignored or misjudged鈥�. The firm also failed to provide important evidence until six months into the investigation.

Levitt said Fieldfisher鈥檚 last-minute disclosure of the 436 documents 鈥渃ompletely changed鈥� her report 鈥� which she had already started writing 鈥� providing clear evidence that the RICS鈥� senior leadership had been trying to find a way to oust the non-execs for months before their dismissal.

The evidence, which Levitt described as the most significant documentation she had seen as part of the investigation, made it necessary for her to ask for new written statements from all relevant witnesses. The review, originally due in July, was not published until last week.

A spokesperson for Fieldfisher said: 鈥淲e are disappointed to note that some of the actions of the firm and the partners who were involved in seeking to help RICS, in what was an exceptionally difficult time for the organisation, have been criticised. Fieldfisher is committed to upholding the highest professional standards and believes that our partners did so in the overall context of the events reviewed by Alison Levitt QC.鈥�

A spokesperson for the RICS said: 鈥淕overning council has accepted all the conclusions of Alison Levitt QC鈥檚 report and is implementing all her recommendations.鈥�

One of Levitt鈥檚 key recommendations is that an ongoing internal review into the future of the institution, which had been chaired by Tompkins and Fontana, should now be conducted by an external reviewer.

Tell us what you think should happen next at the RICS

Now, we want you, our readers, to tell us what you think of the findings of the Levitt review.

Have the resignations come as a surprise? Does the report change how you feel about the RICS and its reputation? Which recommendations in the report stand out? Is another independent review into the RICS鈥� future purpose the right way to go? How quickly does the RICS need to take action to address the failures highlighted in the review?

This governance scandal throws up so many questions, and we want to know what you think about it all.

> To have your say, please email the news team at tom.lowe@building.co.uk