Murray Hunter
FAKED BRITISH TRADE OFFICE LETTER USED BY CMI TO SUPPORT FALSE QUALIFICATION ACCREDITATION CLAIMS
Murray Hunter & Geoffrey Williams
May 19, 2026
A portion of the letter (see in attached article) and Ann Franke
Evidence is mounting that in a desperate attempt to defend their discredited reputation the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) has stooped so low as to use a fake UK government letter to deceive stakeholders in Malaysia, including the Malaysian government into the false belief that they have support from the UK government.
Our investigations have shown that a purported letter of support for the CMI written by a British Department of Business and Trade (UKDBT) education leader Sarah Chidgey is not genuine.
A copy of this letter was forwarded to one of the writers, indicating the letter dated April 9th 2026 has been circulated very widely among CMI stakeholders in Malaysia, including potential 6,000 CMI members and 21 universities.
The letter was even forwarded to the higher echelons of the Malaysian higher education leadership including YBhg. Datuk Dr. Anesee bin Ibrahim the Secretary General at the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) and Prof. Dato’ Dr. Mohammad Shatar Sabran, the Chief Executive Officer of the Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA).
Through examination of the layout of the letter alone, there are several details that indicate this was not an official letter from the DBT. These include:
· The logo and address are not aligned at the top;
· The telephone number at the bottom is a personal mobile number not an official UKDBT contact;
· The telephone format is incorrect for UK mobile numbers and the signature format is also incorrect;
· The signature is electronic or even written with a standard MS Word font which can be easily fabricated;
· The letter itself does not have the recipients’ addresses, positions or proper salutations on it;
· It is not a proper protocol for a letter to be addressed to two very senior people in this way, especially when they hold different roles in different organisations;
· It appears that this is a stock letter with recipients’ names inserted at the top which has been provided to allow CMI to change the recipients and send to a mass audience without further reference to the UKDBT for approval of the mass emails, and
· The letter is already being shared from the CMI in the UK with members of the general public with the recipients Datuk Dr. Anesee and Prof. Dato’ Dr Mohd Shatar identified.
The strangest issue was the name of the file that contained the letter which is labelled “DBT-SUPPORT-LETTER-ANN-FRANKE.” The letter was prepared for the use of Ann Franke, the CEO of the CMI, who faces allegations of perjury and witness tampering in the Malaysian courts.
In addition, the alleged author, Sarah Chidgey, is a member of the CMI International Advisory Committee and appears to have family connections with the CMI senior leadership. As such there is a conflict of interest in her writing this letter on behalf of the UK government.
Third, the remarks made in the letter which claim that the CMI is fully compliant with UK regulatory bodies including Ofqual and that there are no investigations taking place are totally incorrect. Our communications with the UK accreditation agencies found that both Wales and Northern Irelead had requested that CMI stop using their logos on certificates issued overseas. Further, Ofqual is still in the process of carrying out an investigation.
In regard to the Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA), Sarah Chidgey stated that CMI’s certificates are fully acceptable within the MQA framework. This is incorrect and the CMI have been selling unregulated certificates in Malaysia since 2017. Although Sarah mentioned that the CMI Level 7 qualification has an ‘equivalency assessment’, the Level 4 and Level 5 certificates have not received any regulatory endorsement from MQA.
Can the DBT be trusted?
Finally, the letter is defamatory against two unmanned individuals who are claimed to be making false accusations is conduct unbecoming for correspondence coming from a British government department.
The writers have contacted Sarah Chidgey and the media section of DBT twice. One of the writers was given a promise that a formal reply would be provided by May 18 2026 which has passed without any explanation or verification of the letter by DBT.
Consequently, the DBT has given no denial or confirmation as to whether the letter is legitimate.
We also note that all of Sarah Chidgey’s social media has completely disappeared around three days after DBT was contacted by the writers. This is standard procedure in cases where civil servants have been suspended or sacked. No confirmation has been received from DBT.
