*** P7 June 2011 Exam was … Post your comments here and vote in Instant Poll ***

In my opinion it wasnt at all the only problem was that it was really time pressured and in some parts gave too many options to write about, Q2 was pretty easy as it stated that you should analyis the cash flow statement not just going concern of it, and use that info to conclude on if the company was a goin concern and, every question asked for adudit evidence that practicaly full mark for just throwing in some aduit procedures, and question one as long as you talked about held for sale NCA, Revenue recognition, construction contract cost recognition, segmentation and a couple other audit risks with audit evedince for each thats what i did anyone else do the same?

@mfio1985 said:
In my opinion it wasnt at all the only problem was that it was really time pressured and in some parts gave too many options to write about, Q2 was pretty easy as it stated that you should analyis the cash flow statement not just going concern of it, and use that info to conclude on if the company was a goin concern and, every question asked for adudit evidence that practicaly full mark for just throwing in some aduit procedures, and question one as long as you talked about held for sale NCA, Revenue recognition, construction contract cost recognition, segmentation and a couple other audit risks with audit evedince for each thats what i did anyone else do the same?

I wrote about construction contract and i wrote procedure only about estimated additional costs of 350000 it should be immediately recognise as per IAS 11 and because it was estimated it was inherently risky….plus the newly qualified architect making estimates makes it more risky because he may lack the neccessary expertise to carry out complex estimation….and couple more points……….for treasured division IFRS 5 held for sale and discontinued operations and a little bit of IFRS 8 segmentation. Hope I dealt with it correctly.

In q2 I thought it was the assessment of going concern with the review of SOFP and cash flow….so I used both in my analysis.

@cutemishal said:
I wrote about construction contract and i wrote procedure only about estimated additional costs of 350000 it should be immediately recognise as per IAS 11 and because it was estimated it was inherently risky….plus the newly qualified architect making estimates makes it more risky because he may lack the neccessary expertise to carry out complex estimation….and couple more points……….for treasured division IFRS 5 held for sale and discontinued operations and a little bit of IFRS 8 segmentation. Hope I dealt with it correctly.

In q2 I thought it was the assessment of going concern with the review of SOFP and cash flow….so I used both in my analysis.

How did you set yours up ? i done it in breifing note format then looked at each matter such revenue recognition then gave the financial risk then the audit procedure to use

and in Q1aii, i just went through listed all the ethical and QC problems and safeguards

in Q2 i just went through each part of the cashflow forecast and explainded how it could be incorrect on the basis and then conclued at the end how it all ties back to going concern thn followed by audit procduers used to obtain evedence for the cash flow ???

i seperatly done part ii to question 1a in the breifing notes,

it was tough but one could expect this kind of difficulty in professional level papers….the paper was time pressured no doubt about it…q1 and 2 took so long that I was left with 45 min to deal with section B …I was thrown off by q3 part b I had difficulty in suggesting procedures for opening bals..probably messed up 8 marks..but did part a well……Between Q3 and Q5 I wanted to go for question 5 but with the time remaining i thought It was wise to select q3…..Lastly I ve got 25 min left for last Q4 which was a blessing I would say. overall it went well and am hoping to get 50 marks…rest is in the hands of examiners..lets hope for the best.

@mfio1985 said:
How did you set yours up ? i done it in breifing note format then looked at each matter such revenue recognition then gave the financial risk then the audit procedure to use

and in Q1aii, i just went through listed all the ethical and QC problems and safeguards

in Q2 i just went through each part of the cashflow forecast and explainded how it could be incorrect on the basis and then conclued at the end how it all ties back to going concern thn followed by audit procduers used to obtain evedence for the cash flow ???

i seperatly done part ii to question 1a in the breifing notes,

I started with the format then first heading was matters to be considered which were materiality of the estimated additional cost , Risk coz of estimation being subjective..other risk waas management bias cuz they wanted to sell the co, then accounting treatment…I messed up a bit and stated financial statement risk in other heading. ..then i suggested procedure specific to the estimated cost. same headings I used for the next issue….Then for part c I used headings (inadequate audit procedure , too much reliance on management representation and expert issue (the ethical issue was familiarity threat which resulted in the loss of professional skepticism then concluded.
For q2 i used cash flow and SOFP info and explain the matters using heading…declining market (Impairment–overstatment of tangible and non tangible asset ), defferred tax(no future profit but recovery is expected the basis should be assessed) , economic recession (customer default overstated receivables) repayments of debt ….OD doubled ..etc all this will eventually leads to going concern issue ….. and then ..In part b I wrote about the implications on audit report.

@cutemishal said:
oh yes. review of cash flow statement…. throwing in some procedure such as obtaining the correspondence and review the status of the negotiation of loan with parent….checking recepits for payments as an evidence how well the credit control is working ….etc

yea so we sorta done similar stuff lets hope were right lol

anyone remembers the break up on question 1 and 2 ??

What the hell examiner want from us! The paper was so lenghty. He expect us to read 2 and half page question, understand it, calculate the percentages and relation them and then write the answer down in less than 20 min (Referring to part a (i) of question 2). I thinks time was the only issue if there would be time to think the paper was not that hard

Hi guys,

I agree with rmontilva – it was an ok paper, ran out of time for last option question 4, but I think I did well on 1 and 2….and 60% on no 3…I do hope as well, the examiner saw that I tried harder than last time xxx

Based on the comments here, I think what most students failed to do was to review the UK format for June 2010 and December 2010 to see what the new style for P7 INT was going to be. It was mentioned in an article that the UK format had already adopted to the new quesion style since June 2010. This is what actually gave me an idea of what to expect; additionally, P6 – Advanced Tax has been using this question style for a some time now….These are what helped with the new approach in P7 (well, finding the requirement in P6 is even WORST and leading to a DISASTER).

Overall, it was not a bad paper; just, time pressured as usual as with all the papers. I believe the paper was more a practical approach. Thus, persons lacking the external audit experience may find it a bit challenging, as I did for some areas.

hello everyone…
i might be the only person who is attempting f8 n p7 at same time. today’s exam was all about time management. i started q1 which took 90 precious minutes from me… rushed the remaining paper to attempt full in given time.
well in my opinon, paper was tough, but required a control over nerves.
hope to get pass INSHA ALLAH.

I felt confident before the exam, I had studied hard and flt I knew the paper but this was nothing like any practice question I had seen… content and wording was very strange…The time pressure was phenomenal and what was all the cross-cross-cross referencing within the questions and the multiple location requirements?

Question 2 was a disaster – what were we expected to do for (a)?

Can’t even guess how well/badly I performed 🙁

Good luck all