The auditor of BLMIS, David Friehling, failed to uphold the fundamental principles governing an audit by not exercising due care or maintaining professional skepticism. He disregarded his responsibility to independently verify BLMIS's assets, review revenue sources, examine bank accounts, verify liabilities, or confirm the purchase and custody of securities. Additionally, Friehling and his relatives had personal accounts with BLMIS, compromising his independence. In summary, Friehling showed a lack of intent to properly audit BLMIS and gather sufficient evidence, violating several key audit principles.
Auditing and Accounting Cases Investigating Issues of Fraud and Profes (2).docx
1. Auditing and Accounting Cases Investigating Issues of Fraud and Professional Ethics 4th
Edition
Case 2.6 Page 78
1. Refer to the fundamental principles governing an audit. Under the respon-sibilities principle,
auditors are required to exercise due care and maintain professional skepticism throughout the
audit. Based on the case information, discuss the ways in which the BLMIS auditor, David
Friehling, disregarded his responsibility to uphold the fundamental principles governing an audit
Solution
Based on the facts of the case, due care was not exercised by the auditors.
Auditors failed to conduct independent verification of BLMIS assets, review material sources of
BLMIS revenue, examine bank account through which client funds flowed, verify liabilities
related to client accounts or verify the purchase and custody of securities by BLMIS. This all
shows a lack of intent on part of the auditors to gather and evaluate evidence to provide an
opinion. Hence, they did not fulfill the Responsibilities principle. The auditor and/ or his
relatives had accounts with BLMIS showing lack of professional independence as well.