PracticeAccounting FirmsDTI paper offers liability reprieve

DTI paper offers liability reprieve

New proposals on auditor liability, published today by the DTI, will offer hope for the Big Four, but the mid-tier will be disappointed to learn that proportional liability is not one of the options being considered.

Link: The Debate: Is new liability legislation needed?

Currently the law prevents both auditors and directors from having their liability curtailed.

The DTI document sets out five possible responses to the question of auditor liability in relation to work carried out for clients. These are:

  • allowing audit firms to limit their liability with a client, subject only to the general law on contracts;
  • allowing audit firms to limit their liability, with a cap set at a multiple of the audit fee;
  • allowing audit firms to limit their liability, with a cap set at a multiple of total fees paid to the auditor – including any non-audit services provided;
  • allowing audit firms to limit their liability, set as a multiple of the auditor’s turnover; and
  • allowing audit firms to limit their liability at a fixed rate (for example, one rate for the Big Four firms and lower rates for the next tier of firms etc.)

On the question of liability of company directors, the DTI said the options were to maintain the status quo; to implement the Company Law Review recommendations, which include allowing a company to pay a director’s legal costs upfront; or allowing companies to limit the liability of directors against claims for negligence.

Any reform of the law would not provide protection from criminal acts of fraud though.

The Big Four fear one or more of them could be destroyed – in a similar fashion to Andersen – from a multi-billion pound lawsuit and will be lobbying for a liability cap. Mid-tier firms will be more vulnerable to legal claims if such an option is favoured.

DTI secretary Patricia Hewitt said: ‘We do not want regulations that are so stringent, complex or unclear that honest, capable people are put off being directors or auditors.

‘Equally the law must be firm and robust to deal fairly with cases where something has gone wrong – as a result of either negligence or dishonesty.’

Responses to the consultation are requested by 12 March 2004.

Related Articles

BDO’s global revenues pass $8bn

Accounting Firms BDO’s global revenues pass $8bn

4d Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Top 40 International Networks, Associations and Alliances: Finding growth amid uncertainty

Accounting Firms Top 40 International Networks, Associations and Alliances: Finding growth amid uncertainty

7d Philip Smith, Reporter
Top 40 International Networks, Associations and Alliances 2017: Big Four tussle for top spot

Accounting Firms Top 40 International Networks, Associations and Alliances 2017: Big Four tussle for top spot

1w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
BDO reports revenue growth of 5.7%

Accounting Firms BDO reports revenue growth of 5.7%

2w Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Taylorcocks announces merger with Surrey firm

Accounting Firms Taylorcocks announces merger with Surrey firm

2w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Kingston Smith reports 7% gender pay gap

Accounting Firms Kingston Smith reports 7% gender pay gap

2w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
RSM announces two partner promotions

Accounting Firms RSM announces two partner promotions

3w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Backsourcing: The latest accountancy trend?

Accounting Firms Backsourcing: The latest accountancy trend?

1m Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman