• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

New! BPP Books for ACCA September 2022 Exams are now available, get your discount code >>

Groom Co (BB Question Kit)

Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA AAA Exams › Groom Co (BB Question Kit)

  • This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by Kim Smith.
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • March 4, 2021 at 5:08 pm #613360
    srklodhi96
    • Topics: 12
    • Replies: 0
    • ☆

    I have attempted the part (a) of the question Groom Co (BPP Kit). The question relates to professional, ethical and quality issues. I checked the solution which states that the Spaniel Co (the client can sue the auditor). How is this possible ?

    Firstly, the auditors are reportable to the shareholders and owe a duty of care to them and not to the management. Secondly, the auditors provide only reasonable assurance. What is the guarantee that the fraud would have been detected had the procedures been performed over payroll cycle?

    March 4, 2021 at 6:13 pm #613373
    Kim Smith
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 87
    • Replies: 6081
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    I might not be looking at exactly the same version because I don’t have a BPP kit – but in the version I am looking at, the fraud is material (>5% of total assets).

    The unmodified audit opinion gives reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free from material misstatement (page 55 of the notes). But Groom & Co has failed in its responsibilities as stated in the auditor’s report (see top of page 113) because “neither tests of controls nor substantive audit procedures were conducted on payroll”. The auditor MUST perform some substantive procedures on all material classes of transactions, account balances and disclosures (irrespective of whether it performs tests of controls).

    The company has suffered a loss and can absolutely sue the auditor – the company represents the shareholders “as a class”. An individual shareholder could not.

    That procedures, had they been performed, might not have detected the fraud would be no defence – the auditor has not complied with ISAs(!)

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

Specially for OpenTuition students

20% off BPP Books

Get BPP Discount Code

Latest comments

  • Alistair02 on MA Chapter 1 Questions Accounting for Management
  • AymanR7 on Practice Question Klopp
  • Kyle on Translation of the subsidiary – ACCA (SBR) lectures
  • John Moffat on Discounting, Annuities, Perpetuities – ACCA Management Accounting (MA)
  • Joanne94 on Discounting, Annuities, Perpetuities – ACCA Management Accounting (MA)

Copyright © 2022 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in


We use cookies to show you relevant advertising, find out more: Privacy Policy · Cookie Policy