I was wondering if its enough to state one explanation per risk or more as its usually the case with exam kit answers. For example, if the client has taken out a loan then the risks are of misclassification of balances and incorrect accrual of interest. Is it sufficient to state either of these implications and the related response or is it necessary to write more to be on the safe side?
Published answers are exhaustive to cover the spectrum of relevant points. Candidates’ answers need only be sufficient. You should aim for quality not quantity.