Malcolm Stewart, chairman of Kelly Company’s audit committee, received the following communication from Norman Hall, Kelly’s director of internal auditing:

It is becoming increasingly difficult to work with Ms. Fess since she assumed responsibility for the company’s control reporting procedures. A team of auditors led by Vicky Checker, one of our best senior auditors, recently conducted an audit of production control reports. This audit was specifically requested by Ken Kelly, because he claimed that he and his managers were having difficulty understanding some critical information contained in the reports. He has tried to meet with Ms. Fess on several occasions to discuss the reports, but she has been most unapproachable in the matter. She claims that the reports are identical to those of Masters Corporation, where she used to work. Since the auditors have the authority to impose an audit on any office or department, Ken suggested that we investigate these reports for him. He is right. Ms. Fess’s reports are totally inadequate. We recommend that they be changed, but she has been uncooperative from the beginning. She says she is willing only to make a token change in her reports.
I have written this memorandum in the hopes that something could be done to correct the problem with her reports, and we could move on to other assignments.
Required:
Critique the above memorandum as a rejection of the auditee’s response. Which of the guidelines outlined in the chapter for rejections of auditee’s responses seem to be violated?

Transcribed Image Text:

Date: To: From: Subject: January 16, 1986 MEMORANDUM Malcolm Stewart, Chairman of the Audit Committee Ken Kelly, Vice President of Operations Jan Dexter, Controller Curtis Kelly, President and Chairman of the Board Norman Hall, Director of Internal Auditing Rejection of Ms. Fess's proposed action to correct weaknesses in production control reports.