12 / 21
I NVEST I GAT I ONS c o n t .
committed during the period of suspension, no costs order and
publication in general terms.
Matter 5
– The respondent issued a client with a B-BBEE
verification certificate that contained misleading statements
and had content that was not in accordance with SASAE 3502.
The respondent was sentenced to a fine of R20,000, of which
R10,000 has been suspended for three years on condition that
the respondent is not found guilty of unprofessional conduct
committed during the period of suspension, no costs order and
publication in general terms.
Matter 6
– The respondent issued an Exempted Micro-
Enterprise (EME) certificate for a client without performing all
the relevant procedures as required in SASAE 3502.
The respondent was sentenced to a fine of R10,000, of which
R5,000 has been suspended for three years on condition that
the respondent is not found guilty of unprofessional conduct
committed during the period of suspension, no costs order and
publication in general terms.
Matter 7
– In the case of two different clients, the respondent
issued two review reports on the same date. With both clients,
the respondent failed to withdraw the first review report and did
not include a paragraph in the second review report drawing
attention to the first review report with the reasons for its
amendment. In addition, certain content in the review reports
was not in keeping with ISRE 2410.
In addition, the respondent issued an inappropriate
unmodified audit opinion with an emphasis of matter on going
concern in that the material uncertainty was inadequately
disclosed in the financial statements.
The respondent was sentenced to a fine of R150,000, of which
R50,000 has been suspended for three years on condition that
the respondent is not found guilty of unprofessional conduct
committed during the period of suspension, costs order of
R135,000 and publication in general terms.
Matter 8
– The respondent failed to finalise the affairs of two
testamentary trusts and pay out the beneficiaries on due
dates. The respondent failed to timeously file the tax returns of
the trusts, and in addition failed to retain copies of the annual
In the audit of another client, the respondent had not obtained
sufficient appropriate audit evidence on certain specified
aspects to support the unmodified audit opinion expressed.
The respondent was sentenced to a fine of R300,000, of which
R150,000 has been suspended for three years on condition
that the respondent is not found guilty of unprofessional
conduct committed during the period of suspension, no costs
order and publication in general terms.
Matter 3
– The respondent issued an unmodified limited
assurance report on the pro forma financial information in a
client's prospectus which did not comply with the requirements
of ISAE 3000.
The respondent issued an unmodified reporting accountant's
report on the profit forecast and capital growth in a client's
prospectus without performing adequate procedures and
obtaining sufficient appropriate evidence to substantiate the
conclusion in the report.
In the audit of a client, the respondent relied on an expert to
substantiate a significant fair value adjustment but did not
document the procedures required to be performed as set out
in ISA620.
In the audit of another client, the respondent had not obtained
sufficient appropriate audit evidence on certain specified
aspects to support the unmodified audit opinion expressed.
The respondent was sentenced to a fine of R300,000, of which
R150,000 has been suspended for three years on condition
that the respondent is not found guilty of unprofessional
conduct committed during the period of suspension, no costs
order and publication in general terms.
Matter 4
– The respondent prepared an incorrect Broad-
based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) score and
status level on behalf of a client in that the relevant sector
codes were not applied by the respondent. The respondent
then issued the B-BBEE verification certificate, which
contained material errors, together with an unmodified
assurance conclusion.
The respondent was sentenced to a fine of R20,000, of which
R10,000 has been suspended for three years on condition that
the respondent is not found guilty of unprofessional conduct
1 3
Issue 33 January - March 2016