*** F1 December 2012 Exam *** Instant Poll and comments***

Home Forums ACCA Forum ACCA F1 Accountant in Business Forums – FIA FAB Forums *** F1 December 2012 Exam *** Instant Poll and comments***

This topic contains 53 replies, has 26 voices, and was last updated by avatar najula 1 year, 7 months ago. This post has been viewed 277 times

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 54 total)
  • Author
    Posts

  • Avatar of admin
    admin
    Participant
    • Topics: 246
    • Replies: 758

    Post your comments about December 2012 F1 exam.

    Please vote in our Instant Poll


    avatar
    carwyn26
    Member
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 1

    not bad for first exam


    Avatar of boatengbdaniel
    boatengbdaniel
    Participant
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 5

    OPEN TUITION,MAY GOD RICHLY BLESS ALL THOSE WHO CONTRIBUTED TO PROVIDE THIS SERVICE FOR FREE OF CHARGE.THANKS FOR THE NOTES AND THE LECTURES FOR ME PASS WITH EASE.PEACE BE WITH YOU ALL


    avatar
    evanuom
    Participant
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 8

    kinda ok exam, i found the second half of the paper to be the easiest


    Avatar of BAKER
    BAKER
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 2

    50/50


    Avatar of pauld123
    pauld123
    Participant
    • Topics: 3
    • Replies: 16

    Are we allowed to discuss the exact questions? I can remember a lot of them and like all Multiple choice exams a lot of them came down to two very close options. Starting off -

    There was a question early on about fraud. I felt that two options were marginal deception, and one was theft (removal of assets). I think the answer was Deng who was moving money from pirated CDs to an offshore account. What does everyone else think?


    Avatar of smokes2k6
    smokes2k6
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 12

    @pauld123 said:
    Are we allowed to discuss the exact questions? I can remember a lot of them and like all Multiple choice exams a lot of them came down to two very close options. Starting off -

    There was a question early on about fraud. I felt that two options were marginal deception, and one was theft (removal of assets). I think the answer was Deng who was moving money from pirated CDs to an offshore account. What does everyone else think?

    Hey I got that too…the others were more centered around fraud in my opinion also.


    Avatar of tauraiversatile
    tauraiversatile
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 18

    Hope you did well all those who wrote F1, more stuff is waiting here up the ladder….keep on going!


    avatar
    arnoldma
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 6

    Numbers 30++ were ok.Atleast i never needed any shock abzobers(never mind the spelling) throughout the exam.Fingers crossed!!


    Avatar of christ216
    christ216
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 2

    very interesting indeed. the questions were really think and answer type. really good and powerful….. b boy


    avatar
    srushe01
    Participant
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 8

    The exam was not what I expected at all. Second half was easier. I was pretty confident going in there, after reading the first half of the paper I will be glad to get a pass.


    Avatar of pauld123
    pauld123
    Participant
    • Topics: 3
    • Replies: 16

    Okay so next question. There was one about corporate governance & ethics. Mary is a Finance Director in company A and Non-exec director in company B. She sits on risk & rumeneration committees in Company B. Johnny is CEO of company B and Non-exec director at company A, he sits on remuneration committee in Company A.

    The options were: (A)Mary shouldn’t be on a risk committee, (B)Neither should be on two committees, (C)Johnny shouldn’t be CEO of one company and Non-Exec on another at all, or (D)that at least one of them should step down from the rumenartion committee.

    My thinking was – The first two are just wrong as finance Non-Execs should be on risk committees, and You want non-execs on more than one committee to make use of them. The third one is trickier as it is a potential conflict of interest, but the option in the question was universal not case specific. It said a CEO should never be Non-exec elsewhere. Well it is common practice in USA, rare in OZ and about 20-30% in UK. So my thinking was that that was wrong. That leaves the final option being the only one left and also the only one that dealt directly with the objectivity problem of them judging each other’s pay. So my answer was – At least one should step down from the rumenertion committee.

    What does everyone else think?


    avatar
    evanuom
    Participant
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 8

    @pauld123 said:
    Okay so next question. There was one about corporate governance & ethics. Mary is a Finance Director in company A and Non-exec director in company B. She sits on risk & rumeneration committees in Company B. Johnny is CEO of company B and Non-exec director at company A, he sits on remuneration committee in Company A.

    The options were: (A)Mary shouldn’t be on a risk committee, (B)Neither should be on two committees, (C)Johnny shouldn’t be CEO of one company and Non-Exec on another at all, or (D)that at least one of them should step down from the rumenartion committee.

    My thinking was – The first two are just wrong as finance Non-Execs should be on risk committees, and You want non-execs on more than one committee to make use of them. The third one is trickier as it is a potential conflict of interest, but the option in the question was universal not case specific. It said a CEO should never be Non-exec elsewhere. Well it is common practice in USA, rare in OZ and about 20-30% in UK. So my thinking was that that was wrong. That leaves the final option being the only one left and also the only one that dealt directly with the objectivity problem of them judging each other’s pay. So my answer was – At least one should step down from the rumenertion committee.

    What does everyone else think?

    hi, i think the answer is C, because based on the corporate governance code, a director cannot be CEO in one company and any type of director in another company, provided he is employed full time in the current job (CEO).


    Avatar of pauld123
    pauld123
    Participant
    • Topics: 3
    • Replies: 16

    I am not sure that is true. Here is the FRC’s UK Corporate Governance Code:

    http://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/a7f0aa3a-57dd-4341-b3e8-ffa99899e154/UK-Corporate-Governance-Code-September-2012.aspx

    I searched it and I see no mention of CEOs being excluded from being members of other boards. It does say:

    B.3.3. The board should not agree to a full time executive director taking on more than one non-executive directorship in a FTSE 100 company nor the chairmanship of such a company.

    The question didn’t mention anything about FTSE 100 company being involved and didn’t say he was a member of more than two boards. Aslo here is an article from a Australian web forum for CEO’s which indicates it si quite common:

    http://www.ceoforum.com.au/article-detail.cfm?cid=9013&t=/Chris-Thomas–Egon-Zehnder-International/The-place-of-a-serving-CEO-on-another-board/


    avatar
    cheesecake
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 9

    Hi…. Yesterday the paper was difficult for me as i study on my own and none of my peers are taking acca papers. Glad i can discuss it here. I have loads of questions to ask. As for the question about the consultant and his client where he didnt dare to comment negatively on his client proposal for fear of losing this client, wat threat is he facing? I chose the answer intimidation threat. Is dat correct?


    avatar
    cheesecake
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 9

    And the question about the serious conflict between trade union and the company sacking one of the employee, who should resolve the confict? i chose board of directors. Second question on the group of rowdy teenages causing disturbance to other patrons esp those with family so the owner disallowed teenagers patronising there. I chose deontological, the other options are egoist utilitaranian and pluralist. Third question… The one asking to explain the definition of fidiciary. I think i chose A… Someone who has trust and able to…… So can share your answers with me?


    avatar
    cheesecake
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 9

    Yesterday f1 paper got like 5 to 6 long questions. Got quite a number of questions where there are 2 very possible answers. Tricky indeed. I could feel my adrenaline rushing when i doing the paper. In fact…. Some of the questions are testing hard on candidate analytical and intellectual ability. Quite challeging paper indeed. I hope i can pass. Its my first paper and if i flunked it… Its real disastrous for me. Good luck to all those who did f1 yesterday.


    Avatar of pauld123
    pauld123
    Participant
    • Topics: 3
    • Replies: 16

    On the self threat issue I also opted for Intimidation. I didn’t see any actual intimidation but I suppose there was a possibility it could come. The main reason was that the others didn’t seem to fit for me. There could be no self review as they offered no other services, there wasn’t advocacy as they didn’t say they represented the client in the negotiation, and there was no implication of friendliness or over familiarity.

    As for trade union one I also chose directors to settle it as you can’t expect either party (CEO or Union) to be responsible for sorting their own mess and to be honest I thought it was above the heads of the HR department as they had already failed.

    For the rowdy teenagers I thought Utilitarianism, as the owner didn’t have an absolute rule to implement but did what was best for the greatest number of people (there are more families than teenagers). More people end up happy than unhappy.

    I think I got fiduciary wrong I don’t remember trust being an option. I chose the option – “to take reasonable care and diligence”. It is part of it for sure, but I think maybe it is also such a low level that maybe that it is regraded as basic and slightly below fiduciary.

    I found it a really tough exam and was not expecting the long questions. None of the practice tests had so many long interpretive questions, they were mostly short and factual. Could anyone else give their opinions on the questions and our answers. I would be grateful and I suspect Cheesecake would be too.


    Avatar of smokes2k6
    smokes2k6
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 12

    For that first question mentioned i also chose intimidation. The with the trade union I also thought it was the responsibility of the board to sort thigs out considering that the CEO was caught in the mess to begin with.
    In regards to the question asking about fiduciary duties I selected an option where it mentioned something about “one looking out for the well being of the organisation and its stakeholders…basically putting the organisation first in everything that you do.

    The question about the disclaimer..I selected that its purpose was to protect the producer….im a lil uneasy about that one though, because I do remember one of the options mentioning something in legal terms… :-(


    Avatar of pauld123
    pauld123
    Participant
    • Topics: 3
    • Replies: 16

    There was one about controls on a call centre that was suffering identity theft. They asked what was the best preventative method. There was a spot check option, a detailed check option, a threat of sacking, and an option to check references carefully. The sacking option was irrelevant because the thieves all left after 3 months anyway and I felt the other two were detect controls not prevent controls. Therefore I said the best PREVENT control would be to check references carefully. This was not the most useful control but it was the most useful prevent control mentioned. What do other people say?

    As for the exclusion clause question – I also chose the producer. After all that is exactly what they are for in real life. When have you ever seen an exclusion clause written by a supplier for the benefit of the customer? However looking it up online I think I was wrong. Technically it is a clause to protect one of the parties from breach of contract action. So in truth it could be either of them, but I can’t remember any option to say either were protected. Did anyone choose anything else?

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 54 total)

The topic ‘*** F1 December 2012 Exam *** Instant Poll and comments***’ is closed to new replies.