Engineer Fined For Misleading Report

Christchurch engineer Mike Wilton was fined and ordered to undergo supervised professional development after providing a consulting report containing misleading statements and which misused another engineer’s signature.

Mr Wilton was asked to prepare a report about driveway repairs for a property his client had sold. Those repairs were the subject of a hearing at the Disputes Tribunal. Mr Wilton knew his report would be used as evidence at the hearing.

Mr Wilton’s report implied he had carried out a physical inspection of the driveway, when he had not. The report also concluded his client was not at fault for the condition of the driveway, even though Mr Wilton was not in a position to confirm this.

That same report included the name and signature of a second engineer, represented as having reviewed the report. That engineer had no knowledge of the report and had not consented to the use of their name and signature.

Mr Wilton accepted he made a mistake in misusing the engineer’s name and signature for professional purposes, but he had no explanation for how the mistake happened or why he did not inform anyone when he realised what he had done.

The Disciplinary Committee expressed concern that Mr Wilton “lacks insight into the severity of his actions”. It ordered him to undertake professional development in office management and professional ethics.

“We wish to emphasise the educative aspect to our orders while acknowledging that Mr Wilton’s actions fell very far short of what would reasonably be expected of a Chartered Member of Engineering New Zealand.”

Mr Wilton was fined $3,500, which the Disciplinary Committee noted was “at the higher end of the scale to reflect the seriousness of Mr Wilton’s conduct”. He was also ordered to pay $6,430 in costs, which was half of Engineering New Zealand’s total costs into conducting the inquiry.

Read the full decision

© Scoop Media