Use of Professional Association logos

looksee

I would be interested in some feedback or views on the use of professional logos - the ones that people use to show that they are members of professional/ trade/ business etc associations.

I recently had an experience with a professional person who, to put it briefly, mis-quoted the cost of his services, was not able for the job (though he thought he was and was very arrogant about it), produced a job that later had to have three interventions by other professionals to make it usable, charged me well over what he had quoted and did not entirely finish the job. There was no proper contract. He also threatened to sue me for copyright violation if I used the job without paying the full fee - in exasperation I had offered him 4/5 of the fee for what I felt was an inadequate job and to cover costs of putting it right. I paid in full as I urgently needed the job. All the implications of the inadequacy of the job did not become clear until after he had been paid. I consulted my solicitor and his attitude was 'you might as well pay him'.

We could have a long debate about what I might have done wrong, and why did I not do this and that, but it will not help and the above summary is accurate.

The point I am raising is this; he showed and still shows on his website that he is a member of two well known professional bodies, which encouraged me to use his services, along with the status of the person who proposed his name. I (eventually) queried with those bodies whether he was in fact a member, and in both cases it turned out that his membership had lapsed many years ago. In at least one case he was 'only an associate member'; the other association would not give me any information, except that he was not a member, and seemed to be defending his rights despite his non-membership. Neither were interested enough to achieve the removal of the logos from his website.

My solicitor dismissed the use of the logos as 'stuff on the internet cannot be taken seriously'. I would have thought it was false advertising.

So is it false advertising? Who, if anyone, has an obligation to make sure these logos are used properly? Other people who are innocently paying for membership of professional associations are being cheated as the logos can apparently be used freely and ultimately mean nothing. Is there any point complaining to any consumer bodies? (Since then I queried another firm, a tradesman, using a builders federation logo, and he was not entitled to that either, it is still there).

I have paid the fee, accepted I have been cheated, paid the additional charges to get the job sorted, and learned my lesson. I am not going to get any of my money back (over 6000 euro), let everyone else look after themselves, I can't do anything about it. Am I right?

Victor

looksee wrote: »

In at least one case he was 'only an associate member';

Associate member is the title used by some organisations for their ordinary members. It is not a substandard membership.

looksee

I put it in quotes because that is exactly what was said to me, in a tone of voice that suggested it was in some way a lesser membership.

Do you have any views on the attitude of the associations to use by non-members of the logos?

coylemj

I don't think you'll get very far complaining to anyone about misuse of professional body or trade association logos. Over in the Motors forum, there are frequently posts complaining about some cowboy motor dealer who sold the poster a death trap despite him having the SIMI logo displayed prominently on his forecourt.

A lot of 'professional' body organisations exist purely to add lustre and some semblance of respectability to people who operate in an unregulated sector. In most cases, anyone who is operating in that or an associated trade can join up and use the logo. And as you have discovered, when they stop paying their subscription, they can keep using the logo and most trade organisations couldn't be bothered to do anything about it. Which means that the logos are completely meaningless.

You said that the logos on his website 'encouraged' you to use his services, yet you didn't ask him to confirm hat he was in fact a member of those organisations.

Peregrinus

The logos belong to the associations and, while they have the right to object to their use by people not entitled to use them, it's up to the associations to object or not object.

If their logos are being use by cowboys and they choose to do nothing about that, obviously over time that will devalue their logo. But that's up to them; they have no legal obligation to protect the value of their logo. To take your case as an example, you obviously won't be relying on that logo in the future as any kind of indicator or assurance of quality. This is obviously disadvantageous for competent professionals who are entitled to use the logo, but that's a matter between them and the professional association.

But, if your question is, "do I have any right to compensation/redress from the association?", the answer is "no". This is their logo; they are free to devalue it by neglecting to enforce their rights in it; the only people they are answerable to for this are the members of the association.

looksee

Thanks Peregrinus, you have said what I had not entirely sorted out in my head, and its a good point. Does it not come under the heading of misrepresentation, or false advertising though? For the average Joe there is often no way of choosing between one person and another, membership of a professional association is at least a clue that they have a professional existence.

My own experience of membership of such an association was for teaching, I was researched in detail as to my qualifications, and then paid for membership, which was essential to retain my position. Use of the logo was irrelevant. Then there are associations for similar professions with similar levels of qualification that require little more than the payment of a fee. This does seem to suggest that identifying an accountant, a physiotherapist, a surveyor or an engineer by the claim that they are 'Chartered' is unreliable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartered_(professional) - ok, its Wikipedia and mostly discussing the UK - seems to suggest the title is more significant, thus the 'Irish Society of Chartered whatevers' has some claim to authority and legitimacy. Maybe it is time for a little legislative arm twisting of these associations by the government to ensure that use of their logos is regulated - they surely take in enough in fees to be able to do this. One lax association is not only cheapening its own logo, it is also pulling down the perceived authority of all the others.

Peregrinus

If Joe Bloggs misrpresents to you that he is a member of the Chartered Instituted of Qualified Experts when, in fact, he isn't, that is mispresentation. You can sue him for it.

But, note, he made the misrepresentation to you, and you are the one who acted to you detriment in reliance on the misrepresentation. You can sue him for that; the CIQE cannot.

What the CIQE can do is sue him for the tort of "passing off" - claiming to be a member and therefore, in effect, stealing the goodwill of the Institute and of its genuine members. They can sue him for that, if they wish. But they are entitled to look to their own interests in making that decision, not to yours. And, if they did sue him, it would be no help to you - you wouldn't get any compensation out of it.

In general, the Institute would have no role in policing the activities of non-members, and certainly no role in doing so imposed on it for the public good. The exception is where the Insititute has a legal monopoly. For example, only solicitors and barristers can provide legal advice for reward, and it's the job of their professional bodies to pursue and prosecute those who act as lawyers without being legally qualified. Whereas if you take a body like, say, the Institute of Civil Engineers - there's no job which, by law, you have to be a Civil Engineer to do, and the institute has no right, and no obligation, to regulate non-members who offer engineering services. They do have a right to preven them from holding themselves out as members, but they can exercise that right as they choose, or not. You can't take away privileges from them for not exercising their rights, partly because the whole point of a right is that you don't have to exercise it but mainly because they don't have any privileges to begin with - they have no monopoly over the provision of engineering services.

Trasna1

looksee wrote: »

I would be interested in some feedback or views on the use of professional logos - the ones that people use to show that they are members of professional/ trade/ business etc associations.

I recently had an experience with a professional person who, to put it briefly, mis-quoted the cost of his services, was not able for the job (though he thought he was and was very arrogant about it), produced a job that later had to have three interventions by other professionals to make it usable, charged me well over what he had quoted and did not entirely finish the job. There was no proper contract. He also threatened to sue me for copyright violation if I used the job without paying the full fee - in exasperation I had offered him 4/5 of the fee for what I felt was an inadequate job and to cover costs of putting it right. I paid in full as I urgently needed the job. All the implications of the inadequacy of the job did not become clear until after he had been paid. I consulted my solicitor and his attitude was 'you might as well pay him'.

We could have a long debate about what I might have done wrong, and why did I not do this and that, but it will not help and the above summary is accurate.

The point I am raising is this; he showed and still shows on his website that he is a member of two well known professional bodies, which encouraged me to use his services, along with the status of the person who proposed his name. I (eventually) queried with those bodies whether he was in fact a member, and in both cases it turned out that his membership had lapsed many years ago. In at least one case he was 'only an associate member'; the other association would not give me any information, except that he was not a member, and seemed to be defending his rights despite his non-membership. Neither were interested enough to achieve the removal of the logos from his website.

My solicitor dismissed the use of the logos as 'stuff on the internet cannot be taken seriously'. I would have thought it was false advertising.

So is it false advertising? Who, if anyone, has an obligation to make sure these logos are used properly? Other people who are innocently paying for membership of professional associations are being cheated as the logos can apparently be used freely and ultimately mean nothing. Is there any point complaining to any consumer bodies? (Since then I queried another firm, a tradesman, using a builders federation logo, and he was not entitled to that either, it is still there).

I have paid the fee, accepted I have been cheated, paid the additional charges to get the job sorted, and learned my lesson. I am not going to get any of my money back (over 6000 euro), let everyone else look after themselves, I can't do anything about it. Am I right?

If he was using a professional title, then some of them are regulated. For example, Using the title of chartered engineer, if you are not one is illegal as far as I know. I assume this applies to other chartered professions, like account, quantity surveyor etc.

looksee

coylemj wrote: »

I don't think you'll get very far complaining to anyone about misuse of professional body or trade association logos. Over in the Motors forum, there are frequently posts complaining about some cowboy motor dealer who sold the poster a death trap despite him having the SIMI logo displayed prominently on his forecourt.

And is this acceptable? How is the average person supposed to know that SIMI is useless and RECI is not? Presumably (and I could be wrong) someone wrongly claiming to be a member of RECI could face sanctions - or would they just be politely asked to desist from using the logo? Or the Law Society, or the IMO, or Engineers Ireland or ICES - which ones are legit, and which don't care of those, for example?

You said that the logos on his website 'encouraged' you to use his services, yet you didn't ask him to confirm hat he was in fact a member of those organisations.

In a situation where his name had been offered by another professional and the logos were there it is at least partially forgivable that these were taken at face value.

If I had asked him, why would he say anything different to what he was claiming on his website and online cv?

I could say that I will know better in future, but I have also established that even if I had checked with the associations initially, all I would have proved was that a fee had or had not been paid. If the association's checks on qualifications were as thorough as their follow-up of lapsed or non-members then it doesn't prove anything at all. So how can you know you are getting (say) an engineer who knows enough to build a structure that will not fall down, or, indeed, a qualified electrician?

looksee

For example, only solicitors and barristers can provide legal advice for reward, and it's the job of their professional bodies to pursue and prosecute those who act as lawyers without being legally qualified. Whereas if you take a body like, say, the Institute of Civil Engineers - there's no job which, by law, you have to be a Civil Engineer to do, and the institute has no right, and no obligation, to regulate non-members who offer engineering services.

Ok, this is beginning to disentangle things a bit. So there is a professional body 'with teeth' for legal people. Does the same apply to medical people? Any other groups? You can build bridges and motorways without being a civil engineer? Is that correct? How is it decided which groups are significant and which are not?

blackwhite

looksee wrote: »

Thanks Peregrinus, you have said what I had not entirely sorted out in my head, and its a good point. Does it not come under the heading of misrepresentation, or false advertising though? For the average Joe there is often no way of choosing between one person and another, membership of a professional association is at least a clue that they have a professional existence.

My own experience of membership of such an association was for teaching, I was researched in detail as to my qualifications, and then paid for membership, which was essential to retain my position. Use of the logo was irrelevant. Then there are associations for similar professions with similar levels of qualification that require little more than the payment of a fee. This does seem to suggest that identifying an accountant, a physiotherapist, a surveyor or an engineer by the claim that they are 'Chartered' is unreliable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartered_(professional) - ok, its Wikipedia and mostly discussing the UK - seems to suggest the title is more significant, thus the 'Irish Society of Chartered whatevers' has some claim to authority and legitimacy. Maybe it is time for a little legislative arm twisting of these associations by the government to ensure that use of their logos is regulated - they surely take in enough in fees to be able to do this. One lax association is not only cheapening its own logo, it is also pulling down the perceived authority of all the others.

If the association that he purported (and still purports) to be a member of is listed here http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/regprof/index.cfm (filter for Ireland) then there's a possibility that an offence may have been committed.

Certain professions have legal protection from using the term.

Based on my own experience I know that the various accountancy bodies have been lobbying to have it made an offence to call yourself an "accountant" without having a qualification (we're looking at you Bertie! ).

coylemj

looksee wrote: »

Ok, this is beginning to disentangle things a bit. So there is a professional body 'with teeth' for legal people. Does the same apply to medical people?

Yes, it is illegal to practice as a medical doctor or a dentist unless you are registered with the relevant authority.

looksee wrote: »

Any other groups?

Physiotherapists have recently been elevated to a regulated preofsssion. Which means you can't now get a mail order qualification and call yourself a physiotherapist. You have to be a registered (with RGII) gas installer in order to install or service gas appliance. And you're aware of RECI for electricians.

looksee wrote: »

You can build bridges and motorways without being a civil engineer? Is that correct? How is it decided which groups are significant and which are not?

'Engineer' is still a term that is generally abused, hence the increased use of the title 'chartered engineer'. The fellow who went around in a van repairing TVs that were out on rental used to call himself a 'TV engineer'.

I did make the point earlier that the problem you encountered applies to unregulated] sectors.....

coylemj wrote: »

A lot of 'professional' body organisations exist purely to add lustre and some semblance of respectability to people who operate in an unregulated sector.