AAA*** P7 June 2013 Exam was.. Post your comments ***

The revenue figures were given though and there was only 5 % increase. However you guys are right as chairman's statement is not audited. Oh well there goes question 5 down the drain.

On question 1 part 1, ive mainly compared this years figures to last years and worked out percentage rises and falls, then talked about material percentages. People talking about gearing ratios etc has got me worried. I didnt use any of the standard ratios. I thought the question was more aimed at analytical proceedures as in compare this years accounts to last years and seeing what big changes there are - this is where you will find the audit risks. Does this sound okay?

<cite>@jackbailey02 said:</cite> On question 1 part 1, ive mainly compared this years figures to last years and worked out percentage rises and falls, then talked about material percentages. People talking about gearing ratios etc has got me worried. I didnt use any of the standard ratios. I thought the question was more aimed at analytical proceedures as in compare this years accounts to last years and seeing what big changes there are - this is where you will find the audit risks. Does this sound okay?

But aren't accounting ratios part of of analytical procedures? I would think so and would be better place in the scenario than merely noting movements arent you trying to etsblish level of risk by doing these procedures and going concern? Don't know maybe just me!

<cite>@bmparadzi said:</cite> But aren't accounting ratios part of of analytical procedures? I would think so and would be better place in the scenario than merely noting movements arent you trying to etsblish level of risk by doing these procedures and going concern? Don't know maybe just me!

But analytical proceedures is also comparing figures to other data available. I hope both are right!

Question 1 part a was almost same as OAK of Dec '11 attempt. The only thing was the additional information which I failed to write and which I hope isn't worth too many marks :(

Ahh 2hrs for first Question, 30 mins for 2nd and 15mins each on 3rd and 4th. I never was that bad in time management. But I'm hopeful I will pass Inshallah.

Just looked at Oak you are right very identical. However the good news is that in the answer the book states that you do not need to do that many calculations and that they are capped at 4 marks and the answer is more on management bias, going concern, accounting treatments and ofcourse liquidity too.

Aditional information can be the theoratical jedgments made by management on diversifying into saloon business, feasibility of new organic product and citeria of revaluation. Plus your firm's ability to conduct due diligence along with external audit can also be discussed in additional matters or information that was asked in Q1 a.

Q5 the inconsistency in the information provided by the chairman gives rise to Other matter paragraph which is not a modification of the audit report. i don't know if its right oops!!!

<cite>@CONSTY said:</cite> Q5 the inconsistency in the information provises by the chairman give rise to Other matter paragraph which is not a modification of the audit report.

correct

did all first 4 questions but time pressured, so didnt go in too much detail for Q3 & Q4. InshaAllah hoping for a PASS

<cite>@umair85 said:</cite> Ahh 2hrs for first Question, 30 mins for 2nd and 15mins each on 3rd and 4th. I never was that bad in time management. But I'm hopeful I will pass Inshallah.

if this was your first attempt then I can totally relate to what you felt!

<cite>@bmparadzi said:</cite> correct

I wrote it the other way around :|

Q1 a. 24+4 /// 16+2 b. 7 /// 5 Q2 a. 13 /// 8 b. 12 /// 7 Q3 a. 8 /// 3 b. 7 /// 2 c.5 /// 2 Q5 a.7 /// 4 b.7 /// 0.5 c.6 /// 0.5 100 /// 50 :-P

@kuddus No it wasn't first. I failed it at 47 last time thats why I was more conscious about it this time and ended up spending more time on the core parts.

hi guys what was the marks allocation for question 2

Time always kills me in this paper - always waste too much on Q1 and then rush the others. May need to try another option, I work in management accounts so auditing isn't really compulsory for me to have, plus I have zero practical experience of it - I think you need some to pass this.

Q2 was 25 marks - a - 13 and b 12, I think - may be wrong though. I'm trying to wipe the exam from my memory lol!

Okay,, wait.. did any one notice that Question no. 1 had Projections of June 2013. Not forecasts, Projections.. any point any one made regarding that?

Q1: (a) Pre-Analytical procedures (Liquidity, profitability, Working Capital, IAS37 Provision treatment, IAS38 Development costs, insufficient funds/ insufficient loan extension to finance operations + expansion, GOING CONCERN!! and other highlighted issues) (b) Ethical threats: Self Review, Advocacy, CONFLICT OF INTEREST!! Both Acquirer + target Co clients.

exam was good, but lack of time

<cite>@nagdam said:</cite> there was a question about subsequent event. Does anyone know what it should be ? adjusting or non adjusting and why I put non adjusting because the matter of administration did not exist at year end.

It should be adjusting in my opinion since the receivable (or inventory- whatever it was) existed at the year end and could be recovered full once the matter was disclose.

I thought the overall the question was relatively okay! The only criticism I could possibly make would probably be question 1. Found little bit ambiguous and vague ! Could have been asked same question slightly clearer way! Perform preliminary analytical procedure to do what? Understanding the business facing the audit risks, or identify the audit risks or what ? forensic accounting relatively vague too! I can't really say but let's hope for the best!

Q5 by the way was not split parts a, b and c, it was one question. Therefore it required one audit opinion. The combination of adjustments for provision and receivables pretty much wipes out the profit for the year, meaning it is arguably a pervasive misstatement,quite possibly resulting therefore in a disclaimer of opinion or adverse opinion. Previous commenter correct in noting the Chairman's inconsistency results in an Other Matter paragraph

Anyone have any idea how much marks was the "identify and evaluate additional information" worth in question 1 part a?

i JUST realized i have done a blunder in paper by thinking there were three requirements of Q.1[a] ,,by answering question Required: Respond to the email from the audit partner. (34 marks) it is a stupid mistake now that i see that the whole q1 i answered were of [7+24+34]. i am totally messed up with the thought of what i have done....faced huge time issues, left one optional ques....

I really had to ask a question...in Q.1 I didn't have enough time left so I did part b involving ethical issues and I managed to mention the risks in part a and discussed them in 3 to lines each matter. There were 4 issues in total, I was not able to do preliminary analytical procedure and other matters, any idea how much marks I lost in sec a ???

Hi All, Exam was pretty much straighforward, just really working against time made my handwriting seem like shorhand for a bit. Anyways, hoping for 50marks.

Made a major blunder in question 1 - wrote analytical proceudres for reviewing PFI (instead of prelim procedures as asked) and then wrote audit risks facing the business. For other information I wrote a bit on materiality, audit strategy and approach. Q2 was okay with the quailty control, ethics and forensic accounting. Hopeful of a decent mark here. Q3 was okay also and Q5 on the group audit report - I wrote the effects of each on the opinion. Maybe passed both questions here. Doubtful I will pass after the Q1 blunder.

Paper was no different to previous papers...q1 i thought maybe could have been split up in more than two parts...it makes you think it is worth more than it is when the whole question is put forward in that way. the first part had 3 distinct parts in terms of analytics, audit risk and extra info...chance to score some marks though simply by seeing what u had in front of u...and some easy marks to pick up in the ethics part at end too....i see ppl getting hung up on ratios etc that they did or didnt calculate...as long as u pinpoint specific audit risks you will score...read examiners report... 2 was a curve ball...wrote some stuff...common sense and things ive read... 3 was a bit of gift in my opinion...standards were not tricky neither was evidence....the licence at the end i thought was hard to score 5/5 as it didnt give u much info... 5 - ran out of time so had to write basic points for each part...only realised after the ladt said pens down that the second part was adjusting event...still think i will have scored 6 or 7 marks in total... overall just time was a factor....first exam ive really struggled with in terms of time....i think the volume of q1 threw me...still hope to pass first time though as i think i did enough on rest of paper...only time will tell... good luck to u all in the rest of ur papers...hopefully this is all your final sitting