Explorer

The firm relied on certain ITGCs including those over the issuer's online banking application and manual controls in its approach to testing certain deposit liabilities. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm selected for testing controls over user access to the general ledger. The firm did not evaluate the specific review procedures that the control owners performed to determine whether to initially grant access and whether previously granted access continued to be appropriate. (AS 2301.19 and .21)

The firm selected for testing a control over deposit liability reconciliations. The firm did not evaluate the specific review procedures that the control owners performed to determine whether reconciling items were appropriately resolved. (AS 2201.42 and 44)

The firm's internal inspection program had inspected this audit and reviewed these areas but did not identify certain of the deficiencies below. The firm selected for testing certain controls over deposit liabilities that consisted of the issuer's reconciliation and review of deposit payment requests. The firm did not evaluate the specific review procedures that the control owners performed to ensure that deposits were not refunded incorrectly or fraudulently in the approval of withdrawal requests and to ensure the accuracy of the interest-bearing deposits account reconciliations. (AS 2201.42 and .44)

The issuer placed items in deposit suspense accounts when the items needed further evaluation or processing. The firm selected for testing a control that included a review of the issuer's deposit suspense account reconciliations. The firm did not evaluate the review procedures that the control owner performed including the assessment of whether items that had been cleared from the suspense accounts had been appropriately resolved. (AS 2201.42 and .44)

The issuer placed items in deposit clearing or suspense accounts when the items required further evaluation. The firm selected for testing controls that included reviews of daily reconciliations of the issuer's deposit clearing and suspense accounts. The firm did not evaluate the specific review procedures that the control owners performed to understand the nature of reconciling items and assess whether items that had been cleared from those accounts had been appropriately resolved. (AS 2201.42 and .44)

The issuer placed items in deposit suspense or certain cash accounts when the items required further evaluation. The firm selected for testing controls that included reviews of the reconciling items in these accounts. The firm did not evaluate the specific review procedures that the control owners performed to assess whether items that had been cleared from these accounts had been appropriately resolved. (AS 2201.42 and .44)

The issuer placed items in deposit clearing or suspense accounts when the items required further evaluation. The firm selected for testing controls that consisted of reviews of monthly reconciliations of the issuer's deposit clearing and suspense accounts. The firm did not evaluate the review procedures performed including the assessment of whether items that had been cleared from these accounts had been appropriately resolved. (AS 2201.42 and .44)