- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
- Posts
Hi
I would like to ask how best is to tackle questions related to “the matters that should be considered before accepting the audit engagement” /”matters considered whether to accept the appointment”
I looked at 2 questions
– June 2009 c) Dragon Group – and June 2011 3 a) Wexford Co
I was thinking that answering these questions needs to start with explaining the areas of:
– Acceptance (is the firm competent, mention of ethical requirements, integrity of the client)
– establishing preconditions for an audit (managements responsibility for preparing financial stats, internal controls, use of applicable financial reporting framework etc)
But the answers to these 2 questions does not seem to refer to these 2 areas in any explicit way , for example answer to Dragon Co focuses heavily on competence but little on preconditions for an audit
How then to deal with these type of questions to score well?
Thank you !
How far you go in answering any exam question is determined by the number of marks available.
I would very happily see both your sub-headings in an exam answer but with the caveat that both should be relevant and pertinent to the specific question that is asked and that the question itself does not negate the relevance of, for example, the subject of pre-conditions
Hello
yes that makes sense,
I have a problem with making my answers more relevant to the situation in the question, I suppose out of fear of loosing the marks for showing that I know the theory but in P7 it seems doing this doesn’t go a long way at all
Thank you or coming back to me on this
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.