Fund Auditor – PwC

This fraud would not have been possible without the “knowing assistance” of the Fund Auditor – PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC).

PwC was formed the merger of Price Waterhouse and Coopers & Lybrand  in 1998.

Coopers & Lybrand  were the Fund Auditors of a number of Mirror Newspaper Group pension funds that were raided by Robert Maxwell and in sons to the tune of £454 million.

More details on the failure of Coopers & Lybrand to protect the Members who pay for their services as Fund Auditor can be found here.

The following letter dated 9 July 2013 was sent to Mr Luke Sayers, CEO of PwC, confirming that a number of people with a beneficial interest in the trust had been denied access to prescribed “trust documents”:

PwC Sawyers 9 July 2013

A response to this letter was provided by Mary Waldron, Partner Reputation, Regulation & Risk, in a letter dated 19 July 2013 and a copy of this letter is provided at the bottom of this page. This letter confirms that PwC had received advice concerning the fraudulent Breach of Trust but still completed an Audit Report for the financial year ending 30 June 2013 and also completed a purported “Fund Wind-up Report for the period 1 July 2013 to 20 January 2014.That is PwC Audited partners assisted with knowledge in a dishonest and fraudulent design on the part of the purported fund Trustee – this is known as accessorial liability under the second limb of Barnes v Addy

The following letter dated 22 January 2015 was sent to Ms Claire Keating, the Audit partner who signed off the purported “Fund Wind-up Accounts”:

PWC Fund Auditor – Claire Keating 21 Jan 2015

The following letter dated 23 January 2015 was sent to Ms Mary Waldron, Partner Reputation, Regulation & Risk:

PWC Fund Auditor – Mary Waldron 23 Jan 2015

Falsification of Section 35C Compliance Reports

Two Auditor Partners of PwC were repeatedly advised of criminal conduct by Responsible Persons of the purported corporate Trustee, CCSL Limited, yet both Audit Partners continued to dishonestly certify  Section 35C Compliance Reports which have to be submitted to the Prudential Regulator – APRA.

A copy of a letter from APRA to trustees in relation to the Section 35C Compliance Reports can be found on the following link.

APRA Letter to Trustees 21 Sep 2012

A copy of a pro forma Section 35C Compliance Report can be found on the following link.

Pro Forma APRA Section 35C Compliance Report  

The following is an extract from the pro forma Section 35C Compliance Report.


 

Auditor’s responsibility

I have audited the compliance of …………………………….. [insert name of the superannuation entity] with the requirements set out above for the [year / period] ended …/…/…..

My responsibility is to express a conclusion on the [trustee’s / trustees’] compliance with the requirements of the SIS Act, SIS Regulations, FSCODA Reporting Standards, Corporations Act and Corporation Regulations based on the audit. My audit has been conducted in accordance with applicable Standards on Assurance Engagements (ASAE 3100 Compliance Engagements). These Standards require that I comply with relevant ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether the [trustee / trustees] of ………………… [insert name of the superannuation entity] [has / have], in all material respects:

(a)    complied with the relevant requirements of the following provisions (to the extent applicable) of the SIS Act and SIS Regulations:

Sections 19(2), 19(3), 29E(1)(c)(only in relation to the Trustee’s compliance with each measure and procedure within its Risk Management Strategy), 29E(1)(e), 35A, 35C, 36, 65, 66, 67, 69-85, 86-93A, 95, 97, 98, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 109, 117, 118, 122, 124, 125, 126K, 152, 154 and 155(2);

regulations 2.33(2), 3.10, 4.08(3), 5.08, 6.17, 7.04, 7.05, 9.09, 9.14, 9.29, 9.30, 13.14, 13.17, 13.17A; and

(b)    complied with the FSCODA Reporting Standards that are subject to audit (to the extent applicable); and

(c)    complied with the relevant requirements of the following provisions of the Corporations Act and Corporation Regulations (to the extent applicable):

Sections 1012B, 1012F, 1012H(2), 1012I, 1013B, 1013D, 1013K(1), 1013K(2), 1016A(2), 1016A(3), 1017B(1), 1017B(5), 1017C(2), 1017C(3), 1017C(5), 1017C(8), 1017D(1), 1017D(3), 1017D(3A), 1017DA(3), 1017E(2), 1017E(3), 1017E(4), 1020E(8) and 1020E(9); and

regulations 7.9.11O and 7.9.32(3); and

[Additional sections and regulations may be inserted here at the discretion of the Approved Auditor.]


Subsection 1017C(5) of the Corporations Act 2001 concerns compliance with the disclosure of the Deeds of the superannuation trust (and other “trust documents” prescribed by Regulation 7.9.45) to persons who have a beneficial interest in the superannuation trust.

Subsection 1017C(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 concerns compliance with the disclosure on non-exempt documents {subsection 1017C(4)} that are not prescribed by Regulation 7.9.45 of the Corporation Regulations 2001.

SIS Regulation 2.33(2) concerns compliance with the disclosure of the audited accounts and auditor’s report to persons who do not have a beneficial interest in the superannuation trust, such as persons considering to join a fund.

SIS Regulation 4.08(3) concerns compliance with “The Voting Rule“, which requires at least two thirds of all the trustees (which includes both member-elected and employer-nominated)  for a valid resolution by the Board of the corporate Trustee.

Sections 86-93A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 concerns compliance with the “Equal Representation Rule” that was introduced by the Parliament of Australia after Robert Maxwell and his sons stole £454 million from the pension funds of the employees of the Mirror Newspaper Group.

Section 89 prescribes the “basic equal representation rule“. Subsection 89(3)(c) requires a vacancy of a member-elected Director or an employer-nominated Director to be filled within 90 days.

 

The following letters from one of the Audit Partners, David Coogan, and the Mary Waldron, Partner for Reputation, Regulation and Risk confirm that the Audit Partners were advised of the criminal concealment of the original Trust Deed and genuine Deeds of Variation executed before 20 December 1982, when five lawfully appointed trustees  resident in South Australia were unlawfully removed from the office of trustee and replaced by a purported corporate Trustee resident in Victoria, that was in fact a Trustee de don tort.

 

Copies of some of the falsified Section 35C Compliance Reports can be found here.

  PWC 17 Feb 11   PWC 19 July 13
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather