- This topic has 107 replies, 67 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by
.
- Posts
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 5
- ☆
<cite> @sangria9 said:</cite>
It should be written on the first page how many questions – and usual 10 for F4 : )
The last two was on the back of question booklet (for GLO)Hi, thanks for your reply. it’s really awkward to talk about this, I have been experienced so many exams in my life, but this is the first time that I missed questions : ) I should have had a look at the mock exam, and that day my condition was not very good. I need to study more…
<cite>@shaneegg said:</cite>
Same here- causation negligence? Cant even find that in Kaplan’s notes.
Bribery- didnt cover in any detail in class. Think i have failed…I complained to Kaplan because it was not in the chapter. They are going to investigate. I think you guys should do the same.
Just my two cents…
it was a fair paper, I found the dividend question and partnership question slightly tricky but other than that everything else was quite standard really.
Causation and negligence, it was only a two mark question anyway, I mentioned the Wilsher v Essex multiple causes case but wouldn’t be surprised if that was incorrect. Bribery was a gift of a question, you were unlucky to not have prepared for it because the Student Accountant article basically gave you the model answer, the Opentuition notes mentioned bribery would be examinable and Mike mentioned it would probably turn up for this exam too. The breaking chain of causation by claimant themselves, 3rd party and natural events I’m sure was mentioned in the BPP/Opentuition notes too so unlucky if you didn’t cover it.
Would like to thank this website and Mike especially for his fantastic notes and support, bit pre-emptive for me to say so but I think I’ve done enough to pass.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 5
- ☆
Sangria9, I think u may be wrong, since investing later has an effect on the sharing ration, i hope the new sharing ration would be 50:30:10 and the (9000 – 5000) = 4000 must be distributed as a loss between them at sharing ration. All partners are fully liable under PA 1980 remember this
Glad most people had the same blank where it came to the Causation question! Thought I had negligence down to a t but apparently not!
I think I did swimmingly on the contract and legal structure ones, so hopefully the few marks I pick up on the questions I wasn’t particularly confident on will be enough to take it up to a pass mark. Fingers crossed!
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 1
- ☆
I think if I carefully read the technical article about Bribery, my score should be better.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 5
- ☆
<cite> @angele1 said:</cite>
neither did I see ‘but for’ rule… it is what?
I have forgotten all the past cases names, I wrote only 2 or 3… is that sufficient to pass?It could. I wrote this paper in 2011 and passed at 1st attempt. I took a risk, which was not to bother with the cases, provided i could do well in every topic. This was my study plan and it worked for me. Without citing one case, I scored 54% but i wrote quite a lot and finished before time. Like i mentioned earlier this was a risk i took. I had to, cos the cases were obscuring my study. I wish you luck.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 1
- ☆
I think it was a decent paper. I was running out of time and in the last 30 minutes I just rush and attempted something quickly for the ones I hadn’t gotten to as yet. I was frustrated with myself because I looked at the paper and there was nothing there that I had not seen before but I couldn’t remember what I read about them. The Bribery Act question was the last thing I read before sleeping the night before the exam. I remember seeing it in some notes and as an after thought just googled the act , so I didn’t read much on it but when I saw the question I could have spanked myself. I think I did my best . I used an old text book and the lectures and notes on Open Tuition, didn’t take a class so I am happy if I get a passing grade.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 2
- ☆
Was a pretty straight forward paper. Don’t know how I managed not to read anything at all on bribery. Was bowled when I saw an entire bribery question. Otherwise was straight forward. Seems they really tried to cover the entire topic area for most questions.
<cite> @gemsybob1 said:</cite>
anyone wanting to sell their bpp f4 study text book/ revision book ?Want to sell my Kaplan one 🙂
<cite> @kajallad said:</cite>
I complained to Kaplan because it was not in the chapter. They are going to investigate. I think you guys should do the same.I too am in the process of complaining. I covered the book twice, apart from the ‘but for’ rule (be it very minute) the rest of the concept was no where to be found in the books/notes.
<cite>@frankee1 said:</cite>
It could. I wrote this paper in 2011 and passed at 1st attempt. I took a risk, which was not to bother with the cases, provided i could do well in every topic. This was my study plan and it worked for me. Without citing one case, I scored 54% but i wrote quite a lot and finished before time. Like i mentioned earlier this was a risk i took. I had to, cos the cases were obscuring my study. I wish you luck.Hi Frankee, thank you, I hope I pass this exam too.
this is the 1st ACCA paper av done and being new to this,i found that u need to write alot on quite a number of areas. some numbers were okay while others were just ‘jaw dropping’…but seeing you guys comments,am believing to pass. thanks to opentuition for the tests and notes.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 2
- ☆
I will be honest. The exam was easy from what i saw, i just did not study.
I’ve had a response from Kaplan:
Hi Ruhena
We are contacting the Examiner on this as we were not told that this was examinable and that is why this is not in our text. It doesn’t seem to be in the syllabus so caused everyone problems. As soon as we hear anymore we will let you know.
Kind regards
Jenni HudsonCausation and “but for” test wasn’t in my GTG study text either.
Wrote a few things down which I remembered from the negligence section. Not sure how many marks I would have picked up though.
Other than that, the exam was fair. I messed up 3 of the questions as I focused on other topics in the last few days which pushed certain things out of my mind. 🙁
I’ve had a re-read of the paper and I reckon i’ve scored around the 40-44 mark – could be way off with that obviously!
Need to try and forget about it though and push on with F5.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 5
- ☆
But for test, and Causation had been discussed by examiner in his articlle for Tort of Negligence. You people have been slept for so long:
But for Test: means “If it were not but for the action of defendant that the claimant has suffered loss, then the defendant is liable for all the injury or claims by the claimant”
Causation: means what causes the loss in the chain of causality, it is linked with, novus actus intervenien, the examiner has also placed a hint of novus actus intervenien.
I am not a champion but i study 50% of every chapter of syllabus, i study bpp every thing is in their.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 5
- ☆
In F4 the difficult questions amongst all the 10 Qs was the question of how to fund a divident?
All were to reasonable ease but divident was difficult.
well it was 50 % easy 50% difficult because u dont expext but for test contrat scenario was not diffcullt quite similar to june 2010 contract scenario well i did five question in knowledge base very well like Q7 ON COMMON LAW DUTIES Q6 on duties of directors Q1 civil law structure small track fast track multi tarck Q 2 was my best answered i waited for this question to come INTENTION to create legal relation and privity of contract and bribery question and answered Q3 but for test causation done just abt ordinarily and dividend QS 5 just abt ok do i have a chance of passing
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 1
- ☆
Thanks Mike for your very entertaining and informative lectures. Without these lectures, i would have not been able to have the boldness to go and sit for the exam. Thank you to all the OPENTUITION team.
well i did Q1 very well Q2 INTENTION WAS ALSO GUD Q3 WAS TRICKY Q 4 HAD SOME KNOWLEGE Q 5 HAD SOME KNOWLEDGE Q6 WAS VERY EASY Q7 WAS ALSO VERY EASY DID WELL IN Q8 CONSIDERATION PERFORMMANCE OF EXISTING DUTIES Q 9 REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS Q 10 PARTNERSHIP WAS ALSO DONE ETTER SO EXPECTING TO PASS AROUND 60 TO 63
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.