Question 3 in June 2017, 2 local chemical plant had an unfortmate accident Chemicals leaked from a plant holding tank and seeped onto the parking lot Several employee vehicles were damaged and required repainting The company agreed to reimburse employees for the cost of these repairs Employees were instructed to submit their bills for the repairs to the Chief Accountant. Jack Daniels Jack would then issue a check to the employee for the bill. While the internal Auditor Director questioned the Audit Committee about the monitoring of the reimbursements during meeting a month after the content, the Committee determined that procedures in place were adequare Nine months later, at 2 full board meeting, someone made a remark zbout the fact that tills were still being turned in for restebursement By this time, the total of the damages reimbursed to employees had reached nearly $150,000 After making inquiries, it was discovered that some of the repair were for expensive paint jobs, gerades, buiting body repaus, and waxing Further investigation revealed that thousands of dollars were remoused for paint jobs on cars that were damaged prior to the industrial accident. Moreover. some employees had tumne in bid for seriler jobs just a few months apartin other words, some cars were reimbursed for the same repair twice Although this appearea suspicion, no one can at the lunernel auditors came one year after the accident is response to the board's inquir, and reviewed the invoices and compared them with the Esployee List and care repaired. Required 1. What steps thould have been taken by the company to prevent this fraudulent actisits from occurring [s marles) 2. How could niommatian aiready in the accounting system have been used to manim.ze the opportunity for iraudl [2 marks]