The company should have been able to follow up with all venders and customers to attest to the validity of the financial statements and they were not able to do this and not able to gather the “appropriate and sufficient evidence” needed. When a client will not allow the auditor to gather evidence needed to perform a correct auditor then the opinion can be affected. The auditor cannot attest to the fairness of the financial statements if the evidence is lacking or
, the categories of information was sectioned out to address what type of information is not to be disclosed when the employment contract has ended. The different types of information was confirmed to be initially, any information accessible to the public which would not acquire to protection, following this there is information the employee would have obtained through the employment such as knowledge. The law allows ex-employees to use the knowledge and skill they have obtained through employment, this was confirmed in Stenhouse Australia . An employer can restrictive any knowledge gained from the employment. The final category of information is a business secret, which cannot be disclosed the law provides protection to
One huge internal control concern with LJB Company is violation of the segregation of duties internal control principle. The accountant should not serve as Treasurer and Controller. The same employee should not be responsible for related activities and record keeping should be separate from physical custody of the asset. By having the accountant order, pay and receive supplies increases the risk for fraud because they handle related purchasing activities. They can easily use fraud to authorize payment for a false invoice.
The objective of an audit of financial statements is to enable the auditor to express an opinion whether the financial statements are prepared, in all material respects, in conformity with an identified financial reporting framework of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. In essence, materiality should function as a cut-off threshold to determine the nature of the audit testing. Auditors should not reveal its materiality level to clients because clients might take advantage of it to deceive the auditors and make its financial statement better. When the Deloitte auditors are suspicious of certain accounts, they not only can’t reveal it but also make more substantive investigation into these accounts. Question 4: Existence: the
The data collection method should not violate the self-respect or self-esteem of the participants. Any person’s desire to not participate in the survey should be respected. The goal of the researcher is informed consent even for videotaping, recorded interviews, etc. Observers or non-participants should not interfere with the survey. If the study is qualitative, personal bias can skew the data.
We are responsible for noticing and monitoring our own emotions. Right to make sure that opportunities for lawsuits are minimized. (Incorrect) Because the legal process can be both properly used as well as abused, operating from a place of protection is not useful. We cannot guarantee what people will or will not do. Right to expect that processes will be followed.
Kay Lay was the CEO for many years. The number one mistake he made was to hire Jeffrey Skilling. Although he was brilliant at his field, Skilling was unqualified for the job. Ken Lay also let everything slip through. I do not consider him being the master mind of all the dishonest moves but he hired the people to do it for him.
Segregation of duties. The concept underlying segregation of duties is that individuals should not be put in situation in which they could both perpetrate and cover up fraudulent activity by manipulating the accounting records” (Knapp, Rittenberg, Johnstone, & Gramling, 2011, p.205). Duties within a function of a charitable organization should be separated so that one person does not perform processing from the beginning to the end of a process. The principle of segregation is important with regard to both income and expenditure, and capital transactions. Organizations should ensure that no single individual is responsible for receiving, recording, securing and depositing incoming funds, or writing and signing checks (Cuomo, 2005).
Why or why not? The statements made by the employer appear to coincide with an unlawful promise of benefits, and therefore, are unacceptable in relation to the act. The concept of “positive coercion” is addressed in the case study, and these actions directly influence the manner in which employees may view the union and its possible entrance into the organization. In this context, the company does not possess a right to actively or even passively coerce employees into making a decision on one side or another, as this should be an independent decision that is left in the hands of employees without any type of influence. This is an important factor in demonstrating the value that is placed upon organizations and their ability to coerce employees to make decisions in one way or another, and how this type of behavior is unacceptable in all cases.
(b) Should legislation and codes of practice not be followed possible consequences could be:- Individuals: Would not receive the care in a person-centred way. This in turn could have a detrimental effect on their well-being, self-esteem and their dignity. Social Care Worker: It is a legal requirement to implement policies and procedures in accordance with legislation and is part of contractual agreements to work. The consequences of not following procedures can affect just one individual or an entire team of social workers. (c) Inclusive Practice: This can demonstrate, that although we are all unique and have different needs, we are not