The Auditor 's Responsibility For Detecting Fraud

An “audit failure” is a situation in which a professional auditor fails to detect a material error in the financial statements of the company they are auditing. The audit failure in the situation of Rita Crundwell the failure was exacerbated by the fact that the auditors continually signed off on the misstated statements for years. Crundwell is responsible for many of the deficiencies mentioned, such as the missing funds and the incorrect invoices. However, she is not the sole person responsible for this fraud. The lack of internal control is to blame, and this cannot be placed on a single person. The government should have separated duties and used

In my opinion CBN failed to perform sufficient audit procedures in connection with the issuance of these audit reports in violation of PCAOB rules and auditing standards, and failed to appropriately supervise the work of audit assistants. They failure to ensure that sufficient audit procedures were performed on the audits resulted from a poor system of quality control, including inappropriate reliance on inexperienced audit assistants, excessive partner workload and deficient audit documentation practices.

The one pattern within the data that appears to be inconsistent yet if the auditors had established an internal control systems would be Monus the founder moving so freely throughout every aspect of the company with no one checking his movements. From choosing what properties to purchase to purchasing supplies. In any company there should be segregation of duties. For example, the person making the deposits should not be the person writing the checks. Had there been stipulations made it would not have been so convenient to commit the

2 Managing fraud risk: The audit committee perspective Fraud in a fi nancial statement audit

Since the auditors failed to do their job properly, they should be held liable for failing to plan and perform the audit to discover material fraud. The red flags the auditors should have picked up when conducting the audit included rapid growth, bank transfers and other accounts, the avoidance of confirming the insurance restoration jobs, consistency of all the invoices, extravagant life style, cash flow problems, and problems meeting loan payments. Also the auditors never looked at construction contracts, issues, and whether ZZZZ Best had the necessary permits to do the work. This shows the auditors failed to exercise professional skepticism.

During the performance of this integrated audit, require numerous judgments about the internal control and overall financial reporting and how well it addresses risks of material misstatements within the financial statements (AICPA, 2014). After re-evaluating the previous errors found from the previous audit, the audit team found the corrective actions to be appropriate and justified in elimination of human error by implementing additional checks and balances within the manual process. No additional misstatements have been found and all internal controls off the financial reporting seem appropriate and just.

The auditing firm has been in engagement with the company throughout the period when the fraud was being committed. One of the common and clear indicators of possible fraud was the company’s cash flow statement. The company experienced positive growth in its profits from the year 1996 through to the year 1998. However, a close analysis of the cash flow statement shows that the company had experienced negative figures of cash flow from both operating and investing activities and positive cash flow from financing activities which would not sufficiently offset the negative cash flows from operating and investing. It is therefore evident

B) I think the auditors should have equal responsibility for detecting material misstatements due to error and fraud. It’s their job to make sure the financial statements are as accurate as possible. Although it may be hard to check all the information from a company it’s the responsibility of the auditor to sign off that everything is in check.

Fraudulent, erroneous, and illegal acts committed by a public company, usually at a managerial or executive level, have been a very serious problem for many years and have prompted development of strict and updated regulations, such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, in an attempt to prevent these occurrences. Unfortunately, these new or updated regulations are not enough to prevent these acts from happening, thus not alleviating the auditors of their responsibility to detect fraud. Some methods that management and auditors can employ to prevent and detect fraud, errors, and illegal acts are: improving knowledge, improving skills,

With the avalanche of accounting scandals that have rocked the public, people tend to have increasingly high expectation that auditors are accountable for detecting all frauds, while the standards require auditors to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance. The purpose of the report is to discuss the accountability of auditors in detecting fraud by analysing a $16.9 million fraud of Otago District Health Board (ODHB) perpetrated by Swann and Harford from 2000 to 2006. The report will explain the event, the fraud, the stakeholders, the role of auditors and the current situation.

Additional steps should have been taken by the auditors when they received the smudged fax copy printed on the Bank of America letterhead. As mentioned before, the evaluation of the evidence obtained is as important as requesting it. The firm did not confirm the forged documents with the bank; for this reason, the evidence remained unreliable and the forgery wasn’t revealed until later. Auditors should have been concerned with knowing where and whom the confirmation letters came from. Was the initial confirmation request mailed directly by Grant Thorton SpA or by Parmalat or was it obtained directly from the bank? Auditors should be aware that confirmations that are sent through fax are much less reliable than confirmations sent by mail. Their duty was to find out if the correct process was altered in any way.

According to the internal inspection report of the Societe Generale, certain control was absented throughout a period of time. This absent of certain control indicated that a fraud is occurred and alerted the company about it. However, even though Societe Generale is able to identify the problem, the compliance inspector of the company only conducted a routine reviews and did not have a deep detail checking on issues. Besides, the compliance inspector did not asking for any additional information from Kerviel and simply accepted Kerviel’s claims without putting any effort to validate it. Due to this, its shows that the compliance inspector of the bank is failed to identify the cause of the problems occurred which caused by the lack of

An important function of the accounting field is to provide external users of financial statements with assurance that the financial information being presented is both reliable and accurate. This basic function of accounting is so important that there is an entire field of experts, called auditors, dedicated to assuring its proper performance. Throughout history there have been many instances in which the basic equilibrium between an institution and current/potential investor has been threatened due to a lack of accountability and trust between the two parties. This issue has been the catalyst for many discussions regarding the proper procedures a firm should follow in order to provide

A company prepares financial statement to provide information about its financial position and performance. This information is in turn used by a wide range of stakeholders (such as investors, banks, customers, suppliers etc) in making economic decisions with respect to respective economic interest in the company. Typically, in terms of ownership by investment in shares of the company, shareholders though own the company but do not manage it. Therefore, the shareholder and other such stakeholders to get comfort in taking sound decision need independent assurance from the auditors that the financial statements reflect true and fair view of the company affairs in all material respects. Hence, in order to enhance the level of

* Objectiviteit (Het niet toelaten dat het professioneel of zakelijk oordeel van de accountant wordt aangetast door een vooroordeel, belangentegenstelling of ongepaste beïnvloeding door een derde.).