Analyzing The Actions Of Cliff Hall In The Loan Application Of Meridian

Read the David Miller case from Chapter 5. After reading the case, describe a reason why someone who has been entrusted with the firm’s assets would commit a fraudulent act against the company. Based upon your understanding of the case and your professional and personal experience, recommend a series of actions that should have been taken in order to pre

Good morning, your Honor. I am Theresa Pacholik and I am representing Group One. Please let me introduce my colleagues: Chelsea Rowell, Miles Brown and Kimberly Hudson. We come in front of you today with our clients, the Office of Comptroller of Currency (OCC) to show why the court should uphold the decision of the district court against Grant Thornton LLP (Grant Thornton). We will discuss the negligent actions performed during the audit conducted by Grant Thornton and how their unsafe and unsound practices impacted First National Bank of Keystone (Keystone Bank) regulators, shareholders and the public.

An implicit theme of this case that I want students to recognize is the contrast between the persistent and vigorous efforts of David Sokol to “get to the bottom” of the suspicious items he uncovered in JWP’s accounting records versus what Judge William Conner referred to as the “spinelessness” of JWP’s auditors. The JWP audits were similar to most problem audits in that the auditors encountered numerous red flags and questionable entries in the client’s accounting records but, for whatever reason, apparently failed to thoroughly investigate those items. On the other hand, Sokol refused to be deterred in his investigation of the troubling accounting issues that he discovered. The relationships that existed between members of JWP’s accounting staff and the Ernst & Young audit team apparently influenced the outcome of the JWP audits. Of course, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

1.16 (A).1, 5.5(B) - Upon learning that Carl had taken on a case on his own, which is an example of unauthorized practice of law, Attorney Howe should have notified the clients that Carl did not have such authority to take on a case, set discounted fees or conduct an interview without Attorney Howe’s supervision, thus in good consciousness Attorney Howe cannot take on clients under fraudulent circumstances.

Our project team analyzed the Fraud and Illegal Acts Case (True blood Case Studies- Case 08-9), which involves a questionable sales transaction made between Jersey Johnnie’s Surfboard, an SEC registrant, and Mr. Sinaloa, an independent sales representative of the company. As a simplified overview of the case, an external audit firm was hired on to perform a year-end audit of Jersey Johnnie’s Surfboards, Inc. Towards the end of the audit, the engagement partner notified the auditors that there could be a possibility of fraud and illegal acts made by the company.

Grant Thornton should be held liable for its reckless negligence because it ultimately prolonged Keystone bank’s ability to continue to partake in fraudulent activities. If the accounting firm would have held itself to GAAS, generally accepted as the minimum standard of professional conduct in performing an audit, Thornton would have known to exercise “heightened skepticism” during this high risk of fraud. Secondly, GAAS required written confirmations from third parties servicing assets in regards to a bank’s balance sheet. Not only did Thornton fail to obtain this written requirement, it also recklessly relied on an oral statement. GAAS also required in a high risk audit that monthly remittances of interest income on assets being serviced by

Professional auditing standards discuss the three key “conditions” that are typically present when a financial fraud occurs and identify a lengthy list of “fraud risk factors.”

It is clear from the case study that Alistair knows the contract is unorthodox. The problem he faces is whether he should overlook the bribe or report it to the board. The board of directors expects Alistair to tell the truth and report the bribe because of: his position as Chief Legal Officer, the board has a very strong ethics policy and they are wary of unethical activities.

This paper will address the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rationale for charging Cardillo executives with the violations outlined in the case study and identify who was in violation or compliance with the AICPA’s Code of Professional Conduct and the reasons they were or were not complying. This paper will also analyze the actions taken by Cardillo’s outside auditors, evaluate the level of efficiency of the audit risk management, determine whether or not the five components of internal controls were being properly followed and argue for or against whether auditors have a responsibility to assess the judgment of the decisions made by Cardillo’s management.

In the Leslie Fay case, the fraud triangle was not critically evaluated prior to the issuance of unqualified audit opinions. Kenia had no incentive to commit fraud – he owned no company stock and did not receive a compensation based incentive. Pomerantz and Polishan had both of the aforementioned items included within their compensation package. Further, due to the lavish lifestyle and overbearing personalities of both Pomerantz’s and Polishan, they also clearly would have had rationalizations and justifications for the fraud. Additionally, given the “tight ship” Polishan ran in the Wilkes-Barre accounting office, Kenia would not have had opportunity – but Polishan would have, especially considering his close friendship with Pomerantz (Knapp, 2011).

This memo is regarding Hamilton Corporation and the fraud that occurred. When people make decisions they don’t always do it with the right mindset. There are limitations in our judgment processes and we can identify methods to mitigate bias and improve judgment (KPMG Judgment Framework). The four common tendencies that cause limitations in our judgment processes are, availability, confirmation, overconfidence, and anchoring. In this memo I will explain each of the four tendencies, talk about which tendency I believe to have manifested in the Hamilton case, clarify issues relating to auditing the warranty reserve and describe the alternatives that should be considered in auditing the warranty reserve, and finally provide factors that

Ashley Johnson is the sole owner of Johnson Real Estate, hereby referred to as “JRE”, which is a sole proprietorship (LLC) that lists and sells real estate in West Virginia. Ashley’s husband James is the president of JRE and is the day to day operator. Besides James, there are two employees: office manager Joan Rogers and receptionist Doris Chambers. The realtors are contracted sub-agents that personally collect commission checks at the end of each month. These realtors receive 65% of the commission granted to the broker, the rest is deposited into JRE’s checking account. Ashley noticed discrepancies in the commission receipts from closings and the actual bank deposits in the year of 20X9. The previous year there were no problems. JRE has not been audited for the past three years due to rapid growth. Ashley filed a report with the local prosecutor, a family friend, and requested a thorough investigation, which resulted in the prosecutor’s office contracting an accounting firm to complete the financial examination. The prosecutor’s office assigned special agents Thomas and Longworth to the case. The prosecutors are Gina Conrad and Barry Morton.

1) Anna Thomas committed a fraudulent act by making personal charges and cash withdrawals on Rusher Automotive’s credit card. The accounting profession believes there are three conditions necessary for fraudulent behavior. (See Statement on Auditing Standards No. 99, Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. For additional explanation, you may want to review Buckhoff [2001].)

Finding of fact #1: The first finding of fact in this case involves corruption in the company.  According to Sylvia Vega-Sutfin, a former employee of BNC, the bribes known as spiffs are common in the company. She states that most of the underwriters in the company demanded bribes so that they can approve the loans. These claims of corruption or bribery are supported by Colombo, who claims that one of her fellow employees, a male wholesaler, brought her loans with questionable information such as incorrect salaries and home values, and that the male wholesaler even tried to bribe her so that she can allow a loan with incorrect information to be approved.

With the avalanche of accounting scandals that have rocked the public, people tend to have increasingly high expectation that auditors are accountable for detecting all frauds, while the standards require auditors to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance. The purpose of the report is to discuss the accountability of auditors in detecting fraud by analysing a $16.9 million fraud of Otago District Health Board (ODHB) perpetrated by Swann and Harford from 2000 to 2006. The report will explain the event, the fraud, the stakeholders, the role of auditors and the current situation.