TransTec: PwC awaits fall out from report

TransTec: PwC awaits fall out from report

The directors and auditors of TransTec are waiting for the reaction of the Accountants Joint Disciplinary Scheme following last week's damning report by the Department of Trade.

Link: Watchdog considers TransTec action

The report concluded that the PricewaterCoopers’ audit of the company in 1998 was ‘inadequate’, but reserved scathing criticism for the three accountants who ran the company.

Special attention was given to chief executive Richard Carr who was blamed along with finance director Bill Jeffrey for failing to disclose to the board an £11m settlement with Ford Motor Company for breach of contract. Richard Parkin, who replaced Jeffrey as FD in March 1999, was also criticised for failing ?to alert the board or auditors to the nature of the Ford debit notes?.

The JDS is considering the report as part of its own investigation into both auditors and directors. It expects to reach a decision very soon.

However, once again auditors are in trouble. The DTI reached its conclusions after interviewing Jonathan Lander, the partner in charge of the TransTec audit, and Brian Woods-Scawen, the review partner.

The inspectors concluded: ‘The failures in PwC’s audit of TransTec were not failures of technical competence but rather a failure of will ð a lack of robustness and strength of purpose.’

Coopers & Lybrand won the audit contract from what was then BDO Binder Hamlyn in October 1992.

But it was the critical audit for 1998 on which the inspectors focused. They settled on three broad areas.

Firstly, in connection with accounting for the Ford settlement the auditors ‘placed such undue reliance on management representations that they failed to obtain sufficient reliable audit evidence to support the treatment of the transaction in the accounts’.

Of the £11m agreed with Ford, £5.8m was booked as a write-off of tooling, while £1.9m was capitalised as tooling. The remaining £3.6m was not provided for at all.

Secondly the auditors were ‘unwilling to challenge management’ and as a result ‘failed to form an independent view on the 1998 accounts’.

Lastly, they used ‘vague language’ in their dealing with TransTec’s audit committee.

PwC has rejected the conclusions, saying: ‘PwC profoundly disagrees with and rejects the criticisms of it. These criticisms do not reflect a proper construction of auditing standards, nor are they supported by the evidence available to the inspectors.’

Share

Subscribe to get your daily business insights

Resources & Whitepapers

Why Professional Services Firms Should Ditch Folders and Embrace Metadata
Professional Services

Why Professional Services Firms Should Ditch Folders and Embrace Metadata

3y

Why Professional Services Firms Should Ditch Folde...

In the past decade, the professional services industry has transformed significantly. Digital disruptions, increased competition, and changing market ...

View resource
2 Vital keys to Remaining Competitive for Professional Services Firms

2 Vital keys to Remaining Competitive for Professional Services Firms

3y

2 Vital keys to Remaining Competitive for Professi...

In recent months, professional services firms are facing more pressure than ever to deliver value to clients. Often, clients look at the firms own inf...

View resource
Turn Accounts Payable into a value-engine
Accounting Firms

Turn Accounts Payable into a value-engine

3y

Turn Accounts Payable into a value-engine

In a world of instant results and automated workloads, the potential for AP to drive insights and transform results is enormous. But, if you’re still ...

View resource
Digital Links: A guide to MTD in 2021
Making Tax Digital

Digital Links: A guide to MTD in 2021

3y

Digital Links: A guide to MTD in 2021

The first phase of Making Tax Digital (MTD) saw the requirement for the digital submission of the VAT Return using compliant software. That’s now behi...

View resource