Unauthorized loan from contractors

A project engineer is employed by a chemical product manufacturer to supervise the engineering works performed by its contractors. Due to his job nature, he develops a close companionship with a contractor who has recently undertaken a gas tank repair project of the company.
Cover
Image
Unauthorized loan from contractors
Media Feed Source ID
cases_155_cover_en
fade-up
container

A project engineer is employed by a chemical product manufacturer to supervise the engineering works performed by its contractors.   Due to his job nature, he develops a close companionship with a contractor who has recently undertaken a gas tank repair project of the company.

Learning that the project engineer suffers from substantial loss in a recent stock investment, the contractor immediately offers to lend the project engineer $200,000 to help him overcome the financial difficulty.

When time comes for an inspection to be conducted for the gas tank repairing works, the contractor requests the project engineer to turn a blind eye to certain defects found in the finished works, saying that the defects can have little chance to pose a safety hazard.   He also reminds the project engineer of his generosity to him in the past.   The project engineer finds it difficult to require the contractor to rectify all the defects found in the works.

Case Analysis

Besides breaching the Rules of Conduct of the Hong Kong Institution of Engineers, the project engineer may put his employer's interest and public safety at stake if he compromises his objectivity in professional judgment and turns a blind eye to substandard works.

The project engineer should not accept a loan from persons who have business dealings with the company, placing him into a position of obligation that may lead to a conflict of interest.

The project engineer and the contractor may be liable to the charge of a corruption offence under the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO) for offering and accepting a loan, an advantage under the POBO, in relation to the duties of the recipient's company without his employer's permission.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_155

Corruption and Misconduct in Procurement

An assistant manager of a company accepted computer equipment from a sales manager of a computer hardware supplier for placing purchase orders with the latter.
Cover
Image
Risks of corruption in the procurement
Media Feed Source ID
cases_154_cover_en
fade-up
container

An assistant service manager of a company accepted several pieces of computer equipment from a sales manager of a computer hardware supplier, including a scanner, a printer, a projector and a CD writer valued a total of HK$110,000, as a reward for placing purchase orders with the supplier. The company did have procurement guidelines that stipulated the minimum number of quotations required for every purchase. However, the assistant service manager colluded with the supplier to produce false quotations to deceive his employer. The assistant service manager also falsified some documents to get his employer to pay for a hard disk, a monitor and a central processing unit, all of which he took home for his own personal use.

Case Analysis

Both the sales manager who offered advantages to secure business and the greedy assistant service manager had committed a bribery offence under the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance.

The procurement field has always been vulnerable to the risk of corruption, especially on high value goods and services such as information system and IT equipment that require frequent updating.  When a chain of purchases of IT equipment is initiatedor consulting services are outsourced, the situation is rife with opportunities for illicit deals if the procurement process is not properly administered. Furthermore, the fact that the assistant service manager was able to take home some IT equipment revealed that the company’s asset control was a complete failure.

Management usually rely on the expertise in their workforce to perform procurement duties. But that must not excuse, deter or prevent them from instigating the necessary checks and balances to minimise the danger of corruption and malpractice. For examples, managers should lay down procedures and safeguards to prevent tampering or leakage of quotations or tenders during the procurement process. Tender evaluation panel involving professionals can be formed to evaluate the bids of high value or special purchases and make recommendations for senior management to consider. Proper records of quotations/tenders as well as products/services delivered should be kept for checking and future audits. Separating procurement duties from storekeeping duties and conducting inventory check are also helpful to minimize risks of company’s assets being misappropriated.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_154
Show Only in Sector/Industry
False
Sector / Industry Priority display

Deceiving the company by subcontracting a job from a contractor

A software engineer recommended his company to award a software design job to an outside contractor, who then sub-contracted the job back to him.
Cover
Image
Deceiving the company by subcontracting a job from a contractor
Media Feed Source ID
cases_153_cover_en
fade-up
container

When receiving his company's instruction to design a computer software for a digital answering machine, a company's software engineer claimed that he was too busy to take up the job and recommended it to be contracted out to an outside software house which was owned solely by his former colleague.

The software house owner at first had no intention to undertake the job.  But the software engineer persuaded him to secure the job first and then sub-contract it back to the software engineer.  Using the software house as a disguise to deceive his own company, the software engineer could pocket $95,000 being 90% of the project fee while the rest would go to the owner.

Case Analysis

The software engineer contravened the Rules of Conduct of the Hong Kong Institution of Engineers, which require an engineer to offer complete loyalty to his employer and avoid engaging in business, investments or activities which conflict with the interests of his employer.

An employment or contract could be considered as an advantage.  As the software engineer's company neither approved the engineer to take up part-time job nor allowed him to accept any advantage in relation to his duties, the engineer had violated Section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance for assisting the software house to get the job and accepting the project fee in return.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_153

Bribery still exists even if the purpose of the bribe has not been achieved

Susanna was appointed by her company to chair the selection committee for procuring IT equipment. She accepted the bribes from a computer supplier though she knew she could not influence the committee’s decision.
Cover
Image
Bribery still exists even if the purpose of the bribe has not been achieved
Media Feed Source ID
cases_152_cover_en
fade-up
container

An international company intended to set up its South East Asian headquarters in Hong Kong.  A committee was appointed, chaired by the company's vice president, Susanna, to select the supplier of IT equipment and computer software for the new office.

One of Susanna's old school friends, who worked for a computer supplier, learnt of the possible contract and approached Susanna.  In an attempt to influence Susanna's decision over the contract for the IT equipment and software, he gave her an expensive watch as a gift. Though fully aware of her classmate's intention  and  clearly  knowing  that  she  did  not  have  the  power  to  affect  the decision  of  the  committee,  Susanna  still  succumbed  to  the  temptation  and accepted the gift. In a further attempt to influence her decision, her school friend paid Susanna a visit at home and deliberately left behind a new notebook computer, saying it was for her trial use during overseas business trips.

After prudent consideration, the committee finally decided to award the equipment and software contract to another company.  Susanna's old school friend was upset at the outcome but could do nothing about it. Later, some of Susanna's colleagues learnt of the watch and notebook computer, which gave rise to much gossip in her company. The incident eventually drew the attention of senior management and was reported to the ICAC for investigation.

Case Analysis

Susanna's old school friend clearly tried to sweeten her with gifts. He was the offeror and Susanna was the recipient. Even though Susanna subsequently did not place orders with his company, both of them already breached the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO).

Under Section 11 of the POBO, if it is proved that the offeror believes that the advantage given is an inducement or a reward of favours , the recipient of the bribe cannot use the defence that: (a) "he did not actually have the power to do so", (b) "he accepted the advantage without intending to do so" or (c) "he did not in fact do so". It is important to note that accepting any gift or sweetener is an offence under law, even if the final outcome or intent of the gift is not achieved.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_152

Accepting advantage from contractor

Man, an IT manager, was responsible for sourcing a LAN system for his engineering company. A technical sales manager tried to seal the deal by offering Man a set of expensive computer equipment for his personal use.
Cover
Image
Accepting advantage from contractor
Media Feed Source ID
cases_150_cover_en
fade-up
container

Man, an IT manager, was responsible for sourcing a LAN system to be set up in his large engineering company.  He started to contact various contractors and one of them was a medium sized computer firm called ABC whose technical sales manager Gordon was a personable young man.

Gordon tried to persuade Man to use his suggested LAN system by quoting a price at $500,000 and claiming it the best bargain in the market.  Indeed, Gordon had his eyes set on the cost of after-sales service and maintenance which was actually quite profitable.  Man hesitated and said that he needed to seek his supervisor’s approval first as well as to seek a few more other quotations for comparison.  In order to secure the deal, Gordon made a suggestion that he would offer Man a set of free computer equipment of the latest model for his personal use if Man assisted Gordon in getting the contract. 

What should Man do? Should Man accept Gordon’s attractive offer?  Would he commit any offence by doing so?

Case Analysis

Under Section 9(1) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO), it would be an offence if Man (an employee), without the approval of his employer, accepted advantage from Gordon for assisting him in getting the business contract. 

According to Section 2 of the POBO, advantage means any gift, loan, fee, reward or commission, employment, contract, service, favour, payment, release or discharge of loan or liability, etc. The set of free computer equipment offered by Gordon to Man can be regarded as advantage.

Gordon might also violate Section 9(2) of the POBO for offering bribes to Man for the same purpose.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_150

A long shot: facing temptation

Customer Services Officer Tony and part-time phone salesman Curtis worked in the same team in a telephone company. Knowing that Tony was keen at golfing, Curtis offered to fix a golf club membership for Tony if Tony released clients’ personal information…
Cover
Image
A long shot: facing temptation
Media Feed Source ID
cases_148_cover_en
fade-up
container

Tony was a Customer Services Officer of a telephone company.  He tried his best in whatever he was assigned to do.  Very soon, he made a name for himself as a hardworking and responsible young officer.  Soon he got to know a lot of people working in his section.  One of them was Curtis.

Curtis was a part-time phone salesman working with Tony in the same team.  He had contacts everywhere and could gain entry to many exclusive clubs.  He treated Tony to dinners in the evenings, and sometimes even golf trips across the border on Sundays.

Tony picked up golf eagerly. He loved the greens and enjoyed the leisurely pace of the sport.  What was more was the pride of being among the well-to-dos in town.  He wished he had his own golf-membership but he knew it was almost impossible, given his present income and connections.

Curtis could guess what was on Tony's mind and told him, “If you release the personal information of your clients to me, I can fix a membership for you.  You have easy access to the computer records and this should not be a problem.”

Tony knew very well that Curtis would misuse these clients’ personal information for illegal gains.  He did not wish to be part of any scam.  But he could not resist the temptation of the golf membership. It would be decades before he could secure one on his own merits and earnings.  Perhaps it would not be difficult to find another colleague who also had access to the data to be the scapegoat.  Dinner and entertainment by Curtis also flashed across his mind.  Tony began to waver.  Should he say ‘yes’ to Curtis?

Case Analysis

Under Section 9(1) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, it would be an offence if Tony (an employee), without the approval of his employer (the telephone company), accepted an advantage from Curtis for leaking out clients’ personal data. 

According to Section 2 of the POBO, advantage means any gift, loan, fee, reward or commission, employment, contract, service, favour, payment, release or discharge of loan or liability, etc.  Therefore, a golf club membership offered by Curtis can be regarded as an advantage.

Curtis might also violate Section 9(2) of POBO for offering bribes for the same purpose.

Furthermore, Tony and his company might breach the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance for disclosure of personal data of his clients with an intent to obtain gain or cause loss to the company’s clients or failed to protect the personal data of their clients.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_148

Leakage of confidential information to former colleague

An inspector in a government department copied records from the database of his department and sent them to his former colleague who owned a consultancy company for touting businesses.
Cover
Image
Leakage of confidential information to former colleague
Media Feed Source ID
cases_144_cover_en
fade-up
container

One day at dinner time, an inspector of a government department was chatting with a former colleague who owned a consultancy company.  During the meeting, the inspector mentioned that he had been in financial difficulties recently. The owner of the consultancy company took the chance to lend a helping hand to the inspector by offering him a loan of substantial amount.  At the same time, the owner of the consultancy company requested the inspector to copy to him from the database of the departmental computer and saved them into his personal USB.  Those records concerned the business organizations that had failed to comply with the regulations enforced by his department.  In return for the help from his former colleague, the inspector obtained over 100 records and sent them to the owner of the consultancy company.  The owner of the consultancy company used the records as a sales lead, approaching those business organisations on the list and touting his consultancy services to them. Some of the business organisations received sales calls from the consultancy company almost as soon as they had received warning notices from the government. They suspected corruption and reported the matter to the ICAC.

Case Analysis

According to the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO) S.4(1), it is an offence for the owner of the consultancy company to offer advantages (i.e. a loan) to induce a public servant (i.e. the inspector of the government department) to abuse his official capacity by leaking confidential information.  The inspector also violated POBO S.4(2) for accepting bribes in his capacity as a public servant.

Although the department may allow staff to copy information from the computer system into removable storage media for operational need, such arrangement opens up opportunities for information to be leaked.  The use of these media and mobile devices should be properly managed in workplace.  Guidelines alone cannot foster a culture of compliance. Corruption results from inadequately implemented controls and staff misconduct. This case demonstrates that rules are of limited use if no checks are carried out for compliance.  Therefore, managers should always keep a careful eye on subordinates and remind staff to handle conflicts of interest properly.  Misuse of personal data may be a breach of the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance and can expose the company to damaging lawsuits.  Coaching staff is essential for preventing problems.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_144

Falsifying documents to mislead the principal constitutes an offence under the POBO

Tim was the director of a Hong Kong company and was stationed in its Mainland factory. He instructed a transportation company operator to inflate the service fees statement and used the falsified documents to mislead the principal.
Cover
Image
Falsifying documents to mislead the principal constitutes an offence under the POBO
Media Feed Source ID
cases_143_cover_en
fade-up
container

Tim was the director of a Hong Kong company and was stationed in its Mainland factory. In the process of awarding a freight contract to a cross–boundary transportation company for goods to be transported to Hong Kong, he claimed he was the factory owner. Tim also falsely claimed that he needed to inflate the transportation cost to offset certain monthly miscellaneous expenses, which were not chargeable to the company's account. He instructed the transportation company operator to inflate the transportation fees on the monthly statement by HK$20,000. He then submitted the statement to his company for issuing of payment to the transportation company via the personal bank account of the factory accountant.   Tim had subsequently pocketed HK$180,000 through the bank account of the accountant for nine months.

The transportation company operator later discovered that Tim was only a paid director and not the actual factory owner.

Case Analysis

In accordance with the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO), the term "agent" includes individual directors of a company.  In the above case, Tim as a director was an agent of his company.  He breached Section 9(3) of the POBO by intentionally using false documents to deceive and mislead his principal, i.e. the company.

Tim, who provided false information to mislead the transportation company operator, might also commit offences of false accounting and deception.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_143

Profit-splitting

Daphne was responsible for recommending spare parts suppliers to her watch manufacturing company. A supplier suggested marking up the quotation price by 4% so that they could equally share the profits.
Cover
Image
Profit-splitting
Media Feed Source ID
cases_142_cover_en
fade-up
container

Daphne, a purchasing officer in a watch manufacturing company, was responsible for recommending spare parts suppliers.  One day, a supplier, Simon, invited her for a lunch and made a business suggestion.  If Daphne recommended her company continuing to use Simon’s company as a supplier, Simon would mark up the quotation price by 4% from the next purchase order and they could equally split the profit by having 2% each.

Daphne was scandalized when hearing the suggestion.  Although Simon’s suggested mark-up price was still by far the lowest among the lot, the quality of his products was not as good as the others and only just met the company’s required standard.  On a second thought, she needed an extra income at the moment because she had just made the down-payment for her new flat.  After all, her company would still get a good bargain price.

Would Daphne commit an offence if she accepted Simon’s suggestion?  What factors does she need to consider when making a decision?

Case Analysis

Daphne might violate Section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO) if she (as an employee), without the approval of her principal (the watch manufacturing company) accepted an advantage (i.e. 2% profit from the mark-up price offered by Simon) for recommending Simon’s company to her watch manufacturing company.  Simon might also violate POBO for offering bribes.

Daphne was facing a dilemma that might put her personal values such as responsibility and honesty to challenge. In handling the situation, Daphne should identify the relevant facts and take stock of all stakeholders concerned. The following factors should be taken into consideration when identifying viable alternatives and choosing the best course of action:

  1. Any violations to her professional, industry specific, or company code of conduct.
  2. Is it against the Law?
  3. Does it correspond with her self-values such as responsibility and honesty?
  4. Can she disclose her decision to others openly and honestly without misgivings?

The ETHICS PLUS ethical decision making model might be helpful for her in solving the dilemma.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_142

Unauthorized rebate from supplier

Mr Chow, one of the four shareholders of a chemical engineering company in Hong Kong, was in charge of procurement for its mainland factory. A Hong Kong supplier tried to secure orders from Mr Chow by presenting him expensive gift and offering him rebate.
Cover
Image
Unauthorized rebate from supplier
Media Feed Source ID
cases_141_cover_en
fade-up
container

Mr Chow started a joint venture with three of his friends by setting up a chemical engineering company in Hong Kong and a chemical manufacturing factory in Guangdong. The four of them were all directors of the company, each holding 25% of the company shares.

As Mr Chow had substantial experience in operating factories in Chinese Mainland and had developed an extensive business network in Hong Kong and Chinese Mainland especially with Mainland suppliers and government officials, he offered to manage the Mainland factory as the paid General Manager in charge of the business there.

Mr Chow often boasted that the success of the Mainland factory was due to his networking clout. At the same time, he kept grumbling that he had to cover the enormous entertainment expenses with his own money. As the General Manager of the Mainland factory, Mr Chow was entrusted with key procurement decisions. When one of his Hong Kong suppliers learned that Mr Chow had recently bought a property in Chinese Mainland, he presented Mr Chow with an expensive audio- visual set-up, hoping that this gift would secure a contract for the supply of chemical raw materials.

This seemingly thoughtful present soon brought its reward in the form of a first order from Mr Chow. To secure future business, the supplier also offered 5% of the transaction amount as a rebate to Mr Chow at his request. Subsequently, the bribe money was deposited into Mr Chow’s bank account in Hong Kong.

Case Analysis

Under the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO), the principal of a company is the entire Board of Directors, while individual shareholders or directors are considered as agents. In this case, Mr Chow was an 'agent' as he was one of the shareholders and the paid General Manager of the factory. Prior to any solicitation or acceptance of any advantage in the course of business, Mr Chow should have obtained permission from the Board of Directors.

The principal’s permission should be definite and given in advance in accordance with Section 9 of the POBO. Otherwise, the agent has to apply for permission as soon as reasonably practicable after the acceptance. In addition for such permission to be lawful, the principal must have carefully considered the application before granting permission.

Mr Chow’s company had not stated clearly in advance whether or not its staff members could accept advantages in relation to their duties. During the investigation, Mr Chow claimed that he had notified other shareholders that the rebates concerned were used to cover the entertainment expenses incurred in Chinese Mainland. Nevertheless, he had, in fact, only casually brought this matter to the attention of just two of the shareholders. Furthermore, the arrangement had not been discussed at any board meeting or formally approved, and there was no record of the accepted rebates, nor how they were dealt with. As such, Mr Chow was considered not to have obtained the company’s permission to accept the rebate at the material time. Moreover, he had not applied for retrospective approval from his company, and his acceptance of the rebates was not known to and approved by all shareholders. Thus Mr Chow accepted the rebates without the principal’s permission.

To protect the interest of the companies and their stakeholders, companies should take the initiative to formulate rules and regulations governing the acceptance of advantages by their board members and staff and to state clearly in writing the company’s stance and policy regarding acceptance of advantages, and entertainment. The procedures for declaring acceptance of advantages and the channels for making enquiries should also be laid down and made known to all staff.

All Trades/ Industries
Off
migration_resource_id
cases_141
Survey Questions
1. In which country or region are you currently located?
Hong Kong
Chinese Mainland
Other (please specify)
2. What type of organisation do you represent?
Listed company
Large private company
SME / start-up
NGO / non-profit
Public organisation
Chamber / trade association
Other (please specify)
3. What is the size of your organisation?
1 - 49 employees
50-99 employees
100 - 199 employees
200 or more employees
4. What is your staff level or position?
Executive / senior management
Middle management
Professional
Supervisory level
Frontline/Technical Staff
Other (please specify)

Thank you for your feedback.