Citizens Advice finds new auditor after pension hole dispute

Finance | Tania Mason | 14 Dec 2011

Citizens Advice has appointed Crowe Clark Whitehill as its new auditor, replacing Baker Tilly who quit the account over a disagreement about the way the charity treats its pension deficit in its accounts.

Baker Tilly held the audit account for the past four years but announced at the charity’s AGM in September that it would not stand for reappointment.

Since becoming its auditor, Baker Tilly qualified the charity’s accounts every year because Citizens Advice does not include its pension liability on its balance sheet. The latest accounts, for the year ending 31 March 2011, were filed with the Charity Commission last week and also carry a qualified opinion.

Explaining the basis for the qualified opinion this year, Baker Tilly wrote: “In our opinion the existence of an agreed contribution statement provides a sufficiently reliable estimate of the liability such that the net present value of the future payments should be included as a provision on the face of the balance sheet under Financial Reporting Standard 12.

“Based on a discount rate used in the actuarial valuation a provision should be made as at 31 March 2011 of £12,036,000.”

This would reduce the figure on the balance sheet for total assets less all liabilities and accumulated unrestricted funds, by the same amount, the auditors said.

Crowe Clark Whitehall confirmed to civilsociety.co.uk this morning that it has taken over the account. Its head of not-for-profit Pesh Framjee said the auditor did not know how it would approach the pension deficit until it had conducted the audit.

However, he is understood to favour the position that FRS17 takes precedence in such circumstances, meaning that for multi-employer schemes the deficit does not have to go onto the balance sheet.

Directory: Crowe Clark Whitehill LLP | Citizens Advice

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.