Dellboy2007 wrote: » Not too sure about the slides. I wouldn't say they are vital Chris, there is only a slide or two for each sim saying: who you are, who you're reporting too and one liners on the indicators, i.e. Audit risks, etc. It's more helpful in terms of what he says, for example, always look out for plc vs ltd, always refer to standard, etc.
Chris Partlow wrote: » Cheers for that. How long did the session go on for out of interest?
NBA1998 wrote: » Is there only one AAE steps case?
Edelly wrote: » Hey! Have people got stuck into the elective yet? I haven't really at all and am kind of freaking out at this stage as I've still so much to cover in the core! :-(
donnem33 wrote: » did anyone go to the CGS days? would the book of notes be worth buying?
kookies wrote: » I went to the CGS days however I find sean murrays notes much easier to use in terms of answering questions. But thats just my view. They are more specific. I use session 10 as my guide to the relevant lecture slides and so forth! Im sure others will have a different opinion!
Edelly wrote: » Do you not find his notes a little untidy and a bit all over the place though? Or is that just me?
babycake1985 wrote: » Hey! I am repeating the audit elective this year and as I did not attend the classes again I do not have access to any of the notes. Can someone please send me on a link of where I can gain access to Audit Elective case studies pretty please?
cian twomey wrote: » the 2011 paper is a killer, was that the one with the 55% pass rate, thankfully last 2 years have been a lot more doable
Chris Partlow wrote: » What are people's thoughts on the 3 new cases this year? Saved Ballyvaughen til now. Tried it early and I dunno is it me or what but the solution seems all over the place! Very vague and the solution seems to make reference to comments that arent in the case... Also, the solution completely ignored the part in the question regarding the board member in Tipp Credit Union.
mark_m360 wrote: » Yeah found it strange that they left that part out but I suppose it is included in the audit risks. I would of thought that the rationale used would be the tipp board member though. Yeah it doesn't seem as detailed an answer as some. What are the other 2 case studies you refer to?
Soap_Soup wrote: » Autumn 2010 - Daniel Stores In my answer I thought one of the key points was that under ES5 doing the non audit work could be perceived as an advocacy (or management) threat. However they could make use of the PASE as long as they disclose the non audit work performed in the auditors report. The institute's solution doesn't mention any of this. I.e there seems to be no issue in doing the non audit work at all. Can anyone help me understand why I'm wrong?
Chris Partlow wrote: » I don't think you're wrong. If solution to 2012 Happy Holidays AUP question is you're correct. I think because this what an older case and ES 5 had been revised since that's possibly why it wasn't included in the solution for 2010.
Soap_Soup wrote: » I would have thought if you're carrying out non audit services for an audit client you would have to reference ES5 in someway. So - would this mean if asked to carry out agreed upon procedures for an audit client, there are no considerations under the Ethical Standards? Sorry I'm trying to scrape my audit knowledge together today, going through notes etc.
Soap_Soup wrote: » I would have thought if you're carrying out non audit services for an audit client you would have to reference ES5 in someway.So - would this mean if asked to carry out agreed upon procedures for an audit client, there are no considerations under the Ethical Standards? Sorry I'm trying to scrape my audit knowledge together today, going through notes etc.
