|Case 4.6 | |Instructional Notes | | | |Phar-Mor‚ Inc.:
Premium Audit Auditing Financial audit
Case 2-9 Phar-Mor I feel that one major flaw in the Phar-Mor company is the fact that Mickey Monus has full control of the company and could pull off such a giant fraud scam. This is a flawed system in management. There were no checks and balances to keep this fraud from happening. Mickey Monus had so much control of those under him that he convinced them to go along with the fraud. That everything would get better soon and they would not have to worry. The ones that did know about the fraud
Premium Management Corporate governance Corporation
Sean Russi The Case of Phar-Mor Inc ACCT-525 October 31‚ 2012 Case Summary The case of Phar-Mor Inc was one of the biggest pre-Enron frauds that have been uncovered. Phar-Mor Inc established in 1982 Phar-Mor was a small little known discount drugstore. Phar-Mor became well known for offering medications at a 25-40% discount rate compared to your normal pharmacy store prices. Phar-Mor’s first six years of existence seemingly were
Premium Arthur Andersen Accounting scandals Enron
in legal cases involving independence auditor is defined as “failure to conduct an audit with due professional care in the performance of work” C) The primary difference between negligence and fraud is fraud is the intentional concealment or misstatement of information with intent‚ while negligence is the lack of attention to detail‚ that results in material misstatement. Recklessness is when one disregards certain principles or standards during an audit and does not find any fraud. 4. A) The auditors
Premium Auditing Financial audit Audit
Phar-Mor‚ Inc. 1. 2 cases which companies have committed fraud by misstating inventory: • Rocky Mount Undergarment Company‚ Inc. • Leslie Fay Company 2. Intentional misstatements of inventory is difficult to detect‚ as was in the case of Phar-Mor‚ Inc.‚ because of the collusion by employees and/or management to commit fraud. 3. Coopers & Lybrand won the Phar-Mor‚ Inc. account with a very low bid‚ so they wanted to limit their costs by testing only 4 out of the 129 stores
Premium
The Phar-Mor Code of Ethics Phar-Mor strives to be the leading retailer in providing the lowest priced and highest quality goods for our communities‚ while delivering exemplary levels of customer service. Phar-Mor believes in providing a positive and ethical working environment to help guide all employees in word and action‚ which promotes an unshakable framework of integrity and trust between all stakeholders. Phar-Mor endeavors to proactively contribute to its communities through local philanthropies
Premium Ethics
after the company had filed for bankruptcy in 1991. Silverman quickly took Hospitality Franchise Systems public in a 1992 IPO. HFS was among the fastest growing companies of its size in the 1990s and the company’s stock had risen from its IPO price of $4 per share to $77 per share by 1998. The company made a brief foray into the casino industry‚ but then spun off that business in November 1994 as National Gaming.[1] In 1996‚ Cendant purchased Sierra On-Line and Davidson & Associates for $2.2 billion
Premium
Phar-Mor Case Study Phar-Mor Case 4.6 Questions 1. a) By hiring a member of its external audit team a company could gain insight into the auditor’s process and better devise methods of hiding fraud. b) Hiring a former auditor would greatly compromise and possibly impair the existing external auditor’s ability to remain independent. On top of having knowledge about the auditor’s practice‚ preexisting relationships could cause bias in the audit outcome. c) Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 limits the ability
Premium Auditing Audit Financial audit
when they informed Phar-Mor in advance which stores
Premium Finance Management Fraud
Medium 3. The Ultramares v. Touche case held that auditors could be held liable to any foreseen third party for ordinary negligence. Answer: False Difficulty: Medium 4. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 offers recourse against the auditors to a far greater number of investors than does the Securities Act of 1933. Answer: True Difficulty: Medium 5. The precedent set by the Hochfelder v. Ernst case is generally believed to have increased auditors
Premium Tort law Auditor's report Legal terms