Importantandurgent !!! “If you want to get higher score from acca f1, please read this article!”

Teeming and lading - ‘Teeming and lading’ is a ‘juggling’ fraud normally on the sales ledger whereby the receipts of later debtors are allocated to pay off earlier debtors. For example Company X might invoice customers for $100 per day who, for the sake of simplicity, all pay their bills after one week. On day 8 the company will receive $100 from the sales of day 1. The accounts clerk steals this money. On day 9 the company receives $100 from the sales of day 2, but the clerk pretends that this money is in respect of the sales of day 1, and so on each day. In practice, as the fraudster grows in confidence, he often steals larger and larger sums, which increase the amount of earlier invoices that he is settling through later receipts. As long as the organisation regularly issues invoices for similar amounts and the fraudster takes no holidays to allow someone else to see what is happening, such a fraud can continue for some time. Each debtor balance is settled in due course, so no one realises anything is wrong. Usually, one day the fraudster fails to turn up for work, and is never seen again while he keeps the proceeds of the fraud.
Window dressing - involves misrepresentation of information, such as the entering into of transactions before the year end that are often reversed out after the year end, the substance of which was primarily to improve the appearance of the company’s financial statements. For example, a company might have promised its shareholders that it would achieve $10m sales during the year. In December it becomes clear that sales of only $9.5m are going to be achieved. One possibility would be to enter a sale for $0.5m in the December accounts, and then to issue a credit note to the customer for $0.5m in January. The customer doesn’t mind, and the shareholders are happy because $10m of sales were recorded for the year. However the entering of the $0.5m sale in the records was arguably fraudulent. A more subtle approach would be to get in touch with a regular customer in December, and offer them a special discount if they will bring forward $0.5m of their intended January purchases to December. Again, everybody is happy, and the question of whether a fraud has occurred is less clear-cut.

16.