Single question for Brahimhemdani

[wabashcannonball 0]

Can you enlarge on your objections to the accounts, and possible damage to your reputation by sanctioning said accounts.

 

Why would the auditor(s) sign off said accounts, apparently they had no fear that in doing so they would endanger their professional standing, code of ethics or infringe any other statute.

 

What exactly was and is your fear of what you perceive to be irregular/compromised with regard to the accounts.

 

The simple equation is straightforward, either you or the auditor(s) are mistaken in your conclusions, if the auditor(s) are the mistaken/culpable party, that in itself raises very very serious questions....so which of you is mistaken, both of you cannot be right.

 

Also are you able to say what your professional qualifications are, thanks BH, just would like to be clear on the issues.

Edited September 28, 2010 by wabashcannonball

[craig 5,199]

The only part I could hope to answer for BH is that he is an IFA so under the rules and regulations of FSA. I do recall him stating that in his original post.

[wabashcannonball 0]

The only part I could hope to answer for BH is that he is an IFA so under the rules and regulations of FSA. I do recall him stating that in his original post.

 

So not a CA.

[craig 5,199]

So not a CA.

 

I do not believe so, but there are plenty of CA's who are also IFA's so he could be.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Can you enlarge on your objections to the accounts, and possible damage to your reputation by sanctioning said accounts.

 

Why would the auditor(s) sign off said accounts, apparently they had no fear that in doing so they would endanger their professional standing, code of ethics or infringe any other statute.

 

What exactly was and is your fear of what you perceive to be irregular/compromised with regard to the accounts.

 

The simple equation is straightforward, either you or the auditor(s) are mistaken in your conclusions, if the auditor(s) are the mistaken/culpable party, that in itself raises very very serious questions....so which of you is mistaken, both of you cannot be right.

 

Also are you able to say what your professional qualifications are, thanks BH, just would like to be clear on the issues.

 

I am happy to answer this question.

 

I am a qualified independent financial adviser (Cert PFS) with 30+ years experience of financial services and was a Director of the regulator FIMBRA from 1992 - 1997.

 

I cannot answer for the auditors.

 

The auditors stated in their first revised draft management letter that "breaching these Rules could lead to action being taken by the FSA or our taxable status being challenged by the Revenue". As stated I am an Independent Financial Adviser by profession and both I and my business are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). I was not prepared to jeopardise my own business authorisation by being associated with breaches of Rules that the auditors said could result in action being taken by the FSA. Furthermore, I took the view that if I had had signed the Accounts I would be putting my professional standing at risk by condoning the mismanagement and irregularities disclosed in the audit.

 

Rightly or wrongly that was my view at the time and remains by view today, regardless of the fact that the auditors may have changed their mind for whatever reason.

[wabashcannonball 0]

I am happy to answer this question.

 

I am a qualified independent financial adviser (Cert PFS) with 30+ years experience of financial services and was a Director of the regulator FIMBRA from 1992 - 1997.

 

I cannot answer for the auditors.

 

The auditors stated in their first revised draft management letter that "breaching these Rules could lead to action being taken by the FSA or our taxable status being challenged by the Revenue". As stated I am an Independent Financial Adviser by profession and both I and my business are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). I was not prepared to jeopardise my own business authorisation by being associated with breaches of Rules that the auditors said could result in action being taken by the FSA. Furthermore, I took the view that if I had had signed the Accounts I would be putting my professional standing at risk by condoning the mismanagement and irregularities disclosed in the audit.

Rightly or wrongly that was my view at the time and remains by view today, regardless of the fact that the auditors may have changed their mind for whatever reason.

 

Thanks BH appreciated, can you give your view on what you thought to be the bolded, if not, I hope you don't mind me asking, if we all understood your concerns it may clarify the situation for all, thanks again, sorry if I sound invasive.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Thanks BH appreciated, can you give your view on what you thought to be the bolded, if not, I hope you don't mind me asking, if we all understood your concerns it may clarify the situation for all, thanks again, sorry if I sound invasive.

 

The irregularity was what was effectively a loan to a Board member, which the auditors stated was not allowed in the RST Rules and the failure to disclose said loan. By the way it would have been included in the total debtors last year, sorry don't have that figure here, but in my view and others who are professionally qualified in that area it should have been mentioned specifically.

 

I have alluded to the mismanagement re cash transactions in the detailed statement I'll try to amplify that a bit once I get through the other thread.

 

I am happy to help you understand what went on but you may have noticed I was up till 4.00am yesterday.

[wabashcannonball 0]

The irregularity was what was effectively a loan to a Board member, which the auditors stated was not allowed in the RST Rules and the failure to disclose said loan. By the way it would have been included in the total debtors last year, sorry don't have that figure here, but in my view and others who are professionally qualified in that area it should have been mentioned specifically.

 

I have alluded to the mismanagement re cash transactions in the detailed statement I'll try to amplify that a bit once I get through the other thread.

 

I am happy to help you understand what went on but you may have noticed I was up till 4.00am yesterday.

 

Thanks BH, I am probably a wee bit longer in the tooth than you, so being up at 4.00 am is a regular thing with uncertain waterworks, the joys of auld age...allegedly..

[boss 0]

If it has any relevance to the discussion (and it probably hasn't ) I wouldn't have signed the Accounts.

[wabashcannonball 0]

If it has any relevance to the discussion (and it probably hasn't ) I wouldn't have signed the Accounts.

 

Of course it has relevance....if that is a genuine professional opinion, again that raises the question as to why the accounts were put through unqualified, I may be simple but even I can see that both opinions can't be correct, or even meet in the middle....so my question is, should anyone have signed of these accounts as they were presented ?