One company opened two company bank accounts, but when it came time for that company's year end audit the bank did not disclose one of the accounts to the auditor of the company and so no transactions on this were recorded in the company books. However when the auditor of a unrelated company wrote to the bank the bank disclosed the other company's second account to them. What does anyone think of this, was this ok.
Replies (5)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
What about bookkeeping?
"the bank did not disclose one of the accounts to the auditor of the company and so no transactions on this were recorded in the company books"
So, since when did auditors write up the company's books? It is the statutory responsibility of the directors of the company to keep accounting records and to prepare accounts from them. If there were no records of the transactions on this second bank account, it is the fault of the directors.
That said, it seems odd that the bank would fail to mention a second bank account in the company's name in response to a standard audit confirmation request. It is even odder that the bank would disclose a bank account in another company's name to the unrelated company and also, a breach of data protection and client confidentiality. It is odder still that you know both sides of this story. Either the bank has been incompetent twice in dealing with the auditors' confirmation requests (which is not surprising on the first company, but seems to be a massive [***]-up in dealing with the request for the unrelated company) or the second account is not actually in the name of the first company. Without some more facts, it is difficult to comment further.
Wow!
Beware of what you wish - I never expected this!
Sounds like fraud by the two directors who set up the unregulated company. Obviously, different rules apply in Ireland or perhaps, it is the same rules which are not enforced - in the UK, a two partner firm of auditors could not act for a company of which they are both directors. I still do not understand how the bank could have disclosed an account in another company's name - perhaps, the bank was conned by the two directors into thinking that the name was just a trading style of the unregulated company.