Lords accuse auditors of deceiving investors

by Mario Christodoulou

More from this author

24 Nov 2010

  • Comments
lords economic affairs committee 23 Nov 2010

AUDITORS "MISLED" investors in the lead up to the crisis by supplying UK banks with a clean bill of health after being told taxpayers' money would be used to bail them out, a House of Lords Committee has heard.

The Lords' Economic Affairs Committee criticised auditors for signing off on banks' accounts on the basis the UK Government would prop up the banks.

"Your duty is to report to investors the true state of the company. You were giving a statement that was deliberately timed to mislead the company and mislead markets and investors about the true state of those banks and that seems to be a very strange thing for an auditor to do," said Lord Lipsey.

Debate focused on the use of "going concern" guidance, issued by auditors if they believe a company will survive the next year. Auditors said they did not change their going concern guidance because they were told the government would bail out the banks.

"Going concern [means] that a business can pay its debts as they fall due. You meant something thing quite different, you meant that the government would dip into its pockets and give the company money and then it can pay it debts and you gave an unqualified report on that basis," Lipsey said.

Lord Lawson said there was a "threat to solvency" for UK banks which was not reflected in the auditors' reports.

"I find that absolutely astonishing, absolutely astonishing. It seems to me that you are saying that you noticed they were on very thin ice but you were completely relaxed about it because you knew there would be support, in other words, the taxpayer would support them," he said.

Ian Powell, chairman of PwC UK, which audited Northern Rock, said auditors made the best judgments with the information available to them.

He said in 2007 no-one predicted the scale of the banking collapse and later, in 2008, auditors were able to sign off on company accounts because they knew the government would provide support.

"We made the realistic and educated assumption about where the market was likely to go... The view that we formed was that there would be adequate liquidity to sign off on the financial institutions," he said.

John Connolly, senior partner at Deloitte, which audited Royal Bank of Scotland, recounted discussions between auditors and government officials in the months after Lehman Brothers' collapse.

"We had conversations that sought to understand the likelihood of support being forthcoming," he said.

He said auditors failed to see the possibility of global banking collapse in the years leading up to the crisis.

"We were completely aware of what was going on in the world but, like most other people, we didn't appreciate what was going to happen, especially to Lehman Brothers in 2008," he said.

Lord Lawson criticised Connolly for claiming "auditors performed well" in the crisis.

"That seems to me to be extraordinarily self-satisfying in the light of what we now know to be the case," he said.

"You were the auditor of the Royal Bank of Scotland which went belly up within a few months of a clean report."

(Picture shows (from left to right,) Scott Halliday, Ernst & Young; Ian Powell, PriceWaterhouse Coopers; John Griffith-Jones, KPMG; and John Connolly, Deloitte. Parliamentary copyright © 2010-2011)

Visitor comments

blog comments powered by Disqus
display:none

Add your comment

We won't publish your address


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms & Conditions

Your comment will be moderated before publication

Submit
  • Send

Newsletters

Get the latest financial news sent directly to your inbox

  • Best Practice
  • Business
  • Daily Newsletter
  • Essentials

Careers

Search for jobs
Click to search our database of all the latest accountancy roles

Create a profile
Click to set up your profile and let the best recruiters find you

Jobs by email
Sign up to receive regular updates with the latest roles suitable for you

Briefings

budget-management

Why budgeting fails: One management system is not enough

If budgeting is to have any value at all, it needs a radical overhaul. In today's dynamic marketplace, budgeting can no longer serve as a company's only management system; it must integrate with and support dedicated strategy management systems, process improvement systems, and the like. In this paper, Professor Peter Horvath and Dr Ralf Sauter present what's wrong with the current approach to budgeting and how to fix it.

cchcover

iXBRL: Taking stock. Looking forward

In this white paper CCH provide checklists to help accountants and finance professionals both in practice and in business examine these issues and make plans. Also includes a case study of a large commercial organisation working through the first year of mandatory iXBRL filing.