QUALITY REVIEW PROGRAM REVIEW OF FORENSIC ACCOUNTING ENGAGEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

QUALITY REVIEW PROGRAM REVIEW OF FORENSIC ACCOUNTING ENGAGEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

2 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire Review Code(s) Reviewer Review Date INTRODUCTION Forensic Accounting Services as defined in APES 215 means Expert Witness Services, Lay Witness Services, Consulting Expert Services and Investigation Services. In the context of APES 215, such professional services mean services requiring accountancy or related skills performed by a member including accounting, auditing, taxation, management consulting and financial management services. They do not include legal services or formal insolvency appointments. The reviewer may not always have unrestricted access to the engagement file/s due to the often confidential nature of this type of engagement. Where access is limited, the review may need to be carried out in the form of an interview with the member. Where there are two or more partners, separate questionnaires for each partner must be completed. The questionnaire should be marked Y, N, or N/A. In the event that any commentary is provided it should be clearly referenced to the particular question in the questionnaire. All non-compliance with mandatory professional or legislative requirements is to be reported in the quality review report. The reviewer is advised to comment on all non-mandatory breaches in the Other Matters Report. Care should also be taken to ensure that the engagement files reviewed are finalised files, as to review a current file risks the loss of legal professional privilege. PRIVACY In this Privacy Statement, Personal Information has the same meaning as in the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). CPA Australia is committed to protecting the privacy and security of the Personal Information which it holds about you. The Personal Information which you provide us with in this Questionnaire will be used by CPA Australia to process your Quality Review; and may be used for aggregated statistics for monitoring and research. This information may be viewed by the CPA Australia Board Quality Review Advisory Committee and also the Financial Reporting Council and any other Regulatory authority. If you do not provide us with this Personal Information, we may not be able to process your review. You have the right to access any Personal Information which CPA Australia holds about you, subject to the exceptions in the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). You may also request the correction of information which is inaccurate. Access and/or correction requests can be made at your local CPA Australia office. For more information on CPA Australia s Privacy Policy, visit our website at cpaaustralia.com.au/privacypolicy

3 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire PART A. QUESTIONS IN PART A ARE TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL FORENSIC ACCOUNTING SERVICE ENGAGEMENTS. CLIENT AUTHORITY 1. Has permission been obtained from clients for the peer review of their file? Note: Please place the appropriate letter from the below list into the above box that corresponds with the type of file(s) being reviewed (i.e. a = Public Listed, b = Public unlisted etc). Type of engagement files to be reviewed: a. Public listed b. Public unlisted c. Disclosing d. Proprietary large e. Proprietary small f. Superannuation fund g. Incorporated association h. Unincorporated association i. Partnership j. Joint venture k. Unit trust l. Discretionary trust m. Trust account n. Compliance plan o. Individual p. Sole trader q. Other (please list) Each client s authority must be obtained before reviewing their file. If insufficient files exist for which client permission has been provided, and accordingly you believe it not possible to form an opinion based on the small sample size, contact the Quality Review Department at CPA Australia. PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 2. What type of professional service engagement is the file to be reviewed? Note: Please place the appropriate letter from the below list into the above box that corresponds with the type of file(s) being reviewed (i.e. a = Expert Witness Services, b = Lay Witness Services). Type of engagement files to be reviewed: a. Expert Witness Services* b. Lay Witness Services c. Consulting Expert Services d. Investigation Services *Note: For Expert Witness Service engagements only, also complete Part B of this questionnaire. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 3. Has the member complied with the fundamental principles outlined in APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants ( the Code ) and with relevant law? (APES 215.1.8, APES 215.3.1 and APES 110.100) Specifically: Public interest obligations (APES 215.3.2 and APES 110.100); Integrity (APES 215.3.3 and APES 110.110); Objectivity (APES 215.3.3, APES 215.3.4, APES 110.120 and APES 110.280); Conflict of Interest (APES 215.3.4 and APES 110.220) Professional competence and due care (APES 215.3.12 and APES 110.130); and Confidentiality (APES 215.3.17 and APES 110.140). Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of the relevant standard.

4 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire 4. Is there evidence that, where the member was requested to perform an Expert Witness Service and the member or the member s firm has previously provided a Forensic Accounting Services other than an Expert Witness Service, the member considered whether they were able to perform the Expert Witness Service in an objective manner? (APES 215.3.5 and APES 110.220) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.3.5 and APES 110.220. PROFESSIONAL INDEPENDENCE 5. Has the member complied with Independence (as defined in APES 215) where the engagement required independence or where the member purported to be independent? (APES 215.3.6) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.3.6.

5 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire 6. Where the circumstances of the forensic accounting service made the engagement an Assurance Engagement, did the member comply with Section 290 Independence Audit and Review Engagements or Section 291 Independence Assurance Engagements of the Code (as applicable)? (APES 215.3.8 and APES 110.290 or APES 110.291) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.3.8 and APES 110.290 or APES 110.291. 7. Is there evidence that the member provide professional services to a client where the professional services were related to, and in conflict with the objectives of, an Expert Witness Service provided to the client or a different client? (APES 215.3.9) Note: If answered Yes to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.3.9. PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE AND DUE CARE 8. In the event that the member has identified matters outside the member s area/s of professional expertise, has the member: declined all, or that part of, the forensic accounting engagement? or sought expert assistance or advice from a suitably qualified third party, and disclosed the name and qualifications of that third party, as well as the extent of external reliance, in any report issued? (APES 215.3.15) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.3.15.

6 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE AND DUE CARE 9. Did the member document and communicate the terms of engagement in accordance with APES 305 Terms of Engagement? (APES 215.4.1 and APES 305) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.4.1 and APES 305. 10. Where the member was approached by a potential client to undertake the forensic accounting engagement, did the member comply with Section 210 Professional Appointment of the Code? (APES 215.4.2 and APES 110.210) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.4.2 and APES 110.210.

7 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION AND CHANGES IN OPINION 11. Does it appear that the member has knowingly or recklessly made a statement or caused another to make a statement in or in connection with a forensic accounting service that, by its content or by an omission, is false or misleading? (APES 215.6.1) Note: If answered Yes to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.6.1. QUALITY CONTROL 12. Has the member complied with the requirements of APES 320 Quality Control for Firms? (APES 215.7.1 and APES 320) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.7.1 and APES 320. 13. Has the member prepared working papers that appropriately document the work performed, including the basis on which, and the method by which, any calculations, determinations or estimates used in the provision of the forensic accounting service have been made? (APES 215.7.3) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.7.3.

8 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire PROFESSIONAL FEES 14. Has the professional fee for the engagement been computed in accordance with Section 240 Fees and Other Types of Remuneration of the Code? (APES 215.8.1 and APES 110.240) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.8.1 and APES 110.240. 15. Where the forensic accounting service required independence or where the member purported to be independent, did the member enter into a contingent fee arrangement or receive a contingent fee? (APES 215.8.2(b)) Note: If answered Yes to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.8.2(b).

9 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire PART B. QUESTIONS IN PART B ARE TO BE COMPLETED FOR EXPERT WITNESS SERVICE ENGAGEMENTS ONLY. PROFESSIONAL INDEPENDENCE 16. Did the member disclose all matters in their report so that it assisted the Court to assess the degree of the member s independence? (APES 215.3.11) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.3.11. PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE AND DUE CARE 17. Where the member expressed an opinion that was based on the work of another expert, did the member s report state that the member s opinion was based, in part, on the assumption that the other expert s opinion was valid? (APES 215.3.15) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.3.15. EXPERT WITNESS SERVICES 18. Did the member provide Expert Witness Services to a client where the Expert Witness Services were related to, and in conflict with the objectives of, another professional service provided to the client or a different client? (APES 215.5.1) Note: If answered Yes to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.5.1.

10 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire 19. Did the member, when acting as an Expert Witness, comply with the following: a. the paramount duty to the Court which overrides any duty to the client or employer; b. a duty to assist the Court on matters relevant to the member s area of expertise in an objective and unbiased manner; c. a duty not to be an advocate for a party; d. a duty to make it clear to the Court when a particular question or issue falls outside the member s expertise. (APES 215.5.4) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.5.4

11 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire REPORT OF AN EXPERT WITNESS 20. Subject to any legal requirements or restrictions, did the member s Expert Witness Service report clearly communicate: a. the instructions received, whether oral or written; b. any limitations on the scope of work performed; c. a statement of the member s training, study and experience that were relevant to the matters on which the member provided expert evidence; d. whether any of the opinions, findings or conclusions of the Member were not based wholly or substantially on the Member s specialised knowledge derived from training, study or experience; e. the relationships, if any, the member or the member s firm had with any of the parties to the proceedings that may have created a threat or a perceived threat to the member s obligation to comply with the fundamental principles of the Code or the member s paramount duty to the Court, and any appropriate safeguards implemented; f. the extent, if any, of reliance by the member on the work of others; g. the opinions formed, or Other Evidence given, by the member; h. whether an opinion or Other Evidence was provisional rather than concluded, and, if so, the reasons why a concluded opinion or concluded Other Evidence had not been provided; i. the significant facts upon which the opinions or Other Evidence were based; j. the significant assumptions upon which the opinions or Other Evidence were based and the following matters in respect of each significant assumption: i. whether the member was instructed to make the assumption or whether the member chose to make the assumption; and ii. if the member chose to make the assumption, then the reason why the member made that choice; k. if the member considered that an opinion or Other Evidence may have been misleading because a significant assumption was likely to mislead, then a statement to that effect and an explanation of why the assumption was likely to mislead; l. where applicable, that the member s opinion or Other Evidence is based upon another person s report; m. the reasoning by which the member formed the opinions or arrived at the Other Evidence, including an explanation of any method employed and the reasons why that method was chosen; n. a list of all documents and sources of information relied upon in the preparation of the report; o. any restrictions on the use of the report; and p. a statement that the Expert Witness Service was conducted in accordance with APES 215. (APES 215.5.6) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.5.6.

12 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION AND CHANGES IN OPINION 21. In the instance where the member has become aware that an opinion expressed or Other Evidence given by them in a report or in oral evidence was based on information that was false, misleading or contained material omissions, did they subsequently disclose this: in a report or in oral testimony; or to the legal representative of the client, the employer or the Court; or by issuing a supplementary report? (APES 215.6.2) Note: If answered No to the above, the member is in breach of APES 215.6.2.

13 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire OVERALL FINDINGS BREACHES OF MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED: POSITIVE FEEDBACK TO BE CONVEYED TO THE MEMBER(S) IN THE REVIEWER S SUMMARY OTHER MATTERS REPORT: DEFICIENCIES IN THE QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM THAT WILL BE NOTED IN THE REVIEWER S SUMMARY OTHER MATTERS REPORT WITH SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT: APRIL 2017

14 Quality Review Program Review of forensic accounting engagement questionnaire cpaaustralia.com.au