WP kenna play out again...

[BANNED]

On business trip to Bekasi Indonesia, I didnt find out about the case until much later



Dude your hallucination problem is serious. There were 13 points as to why the auditors refuse to sign off. 1 of which was the unaccounted for 20M(it could be a case of someone misplacing the invoice or the entire lift that was suppose to be upgraded), one of the reason was the extra 1.something million that was came up from the handover. One of the reason was the conflict of interest of the TC agent owner. If you only believe in Sylvia Lim's weak excuse which convinently left out all but one, there is no point in continuing this debate. I'll leave U off with this

Pui cheebye pap dog

U so free now right. What are your comments about that mental woman drive past cockup? one sentence reply like u out of town will not do OK Mr. Pua Cheebye dog.

 

[Leongsam]

Pui cheebye pap dog

U so free now right. What are your comments about that mental woman drive past cockup? one sentence reply like u out of town will not do OK Mr. Pua Cheebye dog.

Being rude does not win an argument. It shows poor upbringing.

 

[GoldenDragon]

This is clearly another go at fixing the opposition. Government lost a GRC for the first time in history, they are reeling in shock and finding ways to prevent WP from gaining more ground. So they turn to the PAP rulebook's rule no.6, if threatened by the opposition, dig up their dirty secrets and use the state-owned press to create a big hoo-haa to undermine them. If that fails, there is always rule no.7: If unable to find dirty secrets, make something up and nitpick on the smallest thing you can find, it can be something as mundane as birdshit on the roof, always make use of all state-owned apparatuses such as the police force, mainstream media, government bodies or even grassroot supporters to give legitimacy to your complaints.

I hope PAP keeps up this momentum and continual try to bullshit the people and assassinate the character of WP. Wait 2016, you see WP lose more support or PAP lose more support lo.

SOP for decades. No update. No upgrade.

 

[I_Hate_Pappies]

Pui cheebye pap dog

U so free now right. What are your comments about that mental woman drive past cockup? one sentence reply like u out of town will not do OK Mr. Pua Cheebye dog.

Well said.

 

[BANNED]

Being rude does not win an argument. It shows poor upbringing.

Twit

Whoever told u I was trying to 'win ' my agrument with that fat fuck? My intention is to fuck him up. I leave the reasoning part to others.

BTW your upbringing good? Don't seem this way at all. You so ashamed of your roots.

 

[Leongsam]

Twit

Whoever told u I was trying to 'win ' my agrument with that fat fuck? My intention is to fuck him up. I leave the reasoning part to others.

BTW your upbringing good? Don't seem this way at all. You so ashamed of your roots.

I am very proud of my Persian roots.

 

[Asterix]

I am very proud of my Persian roots.

I am very proud of my Greek roots
Indeed my ancestors stood up to tyrants
Those within as well as from afar

Especially proud am I of what they
Did to great leader Themistocles
When he grew too big for his shoes

[video=youtube;vHMu2gVzspA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHMu2gVzspA[/video]

 

[Char_Azn]

Nonsense. If auditors operate in such a way that they get paid if they see good accounts and not paid if they don't, no one in the world will want to be this industry because when I take a job, I will never know how the accounts is like.

I was just guessing from your lack of general knowledge that you have never done any project, audits or even purchasing before. Now I'm sure of it. In any project or audit even purchasing a service or product in corporate environment, payment is not made until after the thing is being signed off by one or both parties. If its a physical product, you sign a delivery order, sometimes only the buyer signs off. If it is a project or in this case an audit BOTH sides have to sign off.

Obviously the person buying the service have to sign off to confirm that the service project have been completed according to the contract, the vendor also have to sign off to confirm that the completion of everything stated in the contracts. Some times if the project is big enough they are split into several parts and both parties will confirm the completion of each stage of the project and payment is made

If the project is not done in a satisfied manner, they can choose not to sign it off and withhold payment. Similarly if the vendor have signed off the contract and some items are missing U can sue them according to the terms stated in the contract. In this case it is the auditor side that refuse to sign off the audit because there was something wrong with it and they were not able to properly finish the audit

If they sign off to it the auditors can be held responsible if issues like fraud comes up at a later date. Best example is to refer to the old NKF and the on going CHC case.

 

[sleaguepunter]

I only understand ones logic, if WP ppl makan the S$20 million, they would hauled to the courts in chains on national tv by now. Since it has not happen, then they didnt take the money which only show pap trying to pick a bone in the egg.

 

[tanwahp]

I was just guessing from your lack of general knowledge that you have never done any project, audits or even purchasing before. Now I'm sure of it. In any project or audit even purchasing a service or product in corporate environment, payment is not made until after the thing is being signed off by one or both parties. If its a physical product, you sign a delivery order, sometimes only the buyer signs off. If it is a project or in this case an audit BOTH sides have to sign off.

Obviously the person buying the service have to sign off to confirm that the service project have been completed according to the contract, the vendor also have to sign off to confirm that the completion of everything stated in the contracts. Some times if the project is big enough they are split into several parts and both parties will confirm the completion of each stage of the project and payment is made

If the project is not done in a satisfied manner, they can choose not to sign it off and withhold payment. Similarly if the vendor have signed off the contract and some items are missing U can sue them according to the terms stated in the contract. In this case it is the auditor side that refuse to sign off the audit because there was something wrong with it and they were not able to properly finish the audit

If they sign off to it the auditors can be held responsible if issues like fraud comes up at a later date. Best example is to refer to the old NKF and the on going CHC case.

If you were really an expert in procurement or estate management, you would know that auditors are appointed at the beginning of the financial year or term, not, just as you are about to close accounts then you start hunting for an auditor. The invoice will follow.

Secondly, signing off the statements is not the same as verifying that the audit has been completed without or with doubts. If the report is not authentic, it cannot be submitted or MND can't use it as a basis to direct at AHPETC. Who knows if it can be forged?

It seems like logic is lost on you. No auditor will flag issues if that means they cannot receive payment.

By the way, procurement of works, inventory or getting an auditor may be different. For audit, you do not issue purchase orders or sign on delivery orders, variation orders or completion of works. One shouldn't compare blindly.

 

[BANNED]

I was just guessing from your lack of general knowledge that you have never done any project, audits or even purchasing before. Now I'm sure of it. In any project or audit even purchasing a service or product in corporate environment, payment is not made until after the thing is being signed off by one or both parties. If its a physical product, you sign a delivery order, sometimes only the buyer signs off. If it is a project or in this case an audit BOTH sides have to sign off.

Obviously the person buying the service have to sign off to confirm that the service project have been completed according to the contract, the vendor also haverties will confirm the completion of each stage of the project and payment is made

If the project is not done

If they sign off to it the auditors can be held responsible if issues like fraud comes up at a later date. Best example is to refer to the old NKF and the on going CHC case.

I am guessing from the way you write you look like loan oily fat overweight ugly pig like creature. I am guessing your favorite past time is to suck and swallow your pap master cum.

 

[sleaguepunter]

I was just guessing from your lack of general knowledge that you have never done any project, audits or even purchasing before. Now I'm sure of it. In any project or audit even purchasing a service or product in corporate environment, payment is not made until after the thing is being signed off by one or both parties. If its a physical product, you sign a delivery order, sometimes only the buyer signs off. If it is a project or in this case an audit BOTH sides have to sign off.

Obviously the person buying the service have to sign off to confirm that the service project have been completed according to the contract, the vendor also have to sign off to confirm that the completion of everything stated in the contracts. Some times if the project is big enough they are split into several parts and both parties will confirm the completion of each stage of the project and payment is made

If the project is not done in a satisfied manner, they can choose not to sign it off and withhold payment. Similarly if the vendor have signed off the contract and some items are missing U can sue them according to the terms stated in the contract. In this case it is the auditor side that refuse to sign off the audit because there was something wrong with it and they were not able to properly finish the audit

If they sign off to it the auditors can be held responsible if issues like fraud comes up at a later date. Best example is to refer to the old NKF and the on going CHC case.

Auditors are not liable if company is fraudulent as long as the auditors had follow proper procedures when conducting the audit. It the responsibilities of the company managements to volunteer the information to auditors, the auditors can raise questions and as long auditors done the tests according to company act and other statutory requirements, they are not liable in courts.

Btw, even if the auditors don't sign off the audit or report to authorities on its client illegal bookkeeping, the client still have to pay for the services rendered, period.

I am surprise nobody corrected u on this given the fact spore produce thousands of accounts grads a year. Maybe too many are women and only found in flowerpod.

 

[Kuailan]

No need to read. Another fixing from the pappies. :oIo:

Yes I will FIX the OPPOSITION as mentioned some time BACK!!

By you know WHO?"?"

 

[Poomer]

I was just guessing from your lack of general knowledge that you have never done any project, audits or even purchasing before. Now I'm sure of it. In any project or audit even purchasing a service or product in corporate environment, payment is not made until after the thing is being signed off by one or both parties. If its a physical product, you sign a delivery order, sometimes only the buyer signs off. If it is a project or in this case an audit BOTH sides have to sign off.

Obviously the person buying the service have to sign off to confirm that the service project have been completed according to the contract, the vendor also have to sign off to confirm that the completion of everything stated in the contracts. Some times if the project is big enough they are split into several parts and both parties will confirm the completion of each stage of the project and payment is made

If the project is not done in a satisfied manner, they can choose not to sign it off and withhold payment. Similarly if the vendor have signed off the contract and some items are missing U can sue them according to the terms stated in the contract. In this case it is the auditor side that refuse to sign off the audit because there was something wrong with it and they were not able to properly finish the audit

If they sign off to it the auditors can be held responsible if issues like fraud comes up at a later date. Best example is to refer to the old NKF and the on going CHC case.

If what you say is true, auditors are beholden to their clients to the point that they don't get paid if they don't sign off. In which case, what is the point of an auditor, when sole purpose is to ensure that the books are clean to get paid.

So fine, lets take your scenario that the auditors have to ensure everything swee swee to get paid right? Then why the fuck they don't sign off this time round? So AHPETC hires an auditing firm to audit their accounts and the auditor refuses to sign off, thus doesn't get paid. So you think the auditing firm is a fucking charity? Obviously not right? So the only logical explanation is someone paid them off, as you've kindly informed us that there is no way in hell that AHPETC will pay off their auditor who refuse them and the last time I checked the only accountants to appear in the news were for misappropriating company funds, not for begging on the street because they were not paid. So we now come to the million dollar question, which is who paid them off? Clearly, the breadcrumbs point in one direction, doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to answer that one.

 

[BANNED]

I am guessing from the way you write you look like loan oily fat overweight ugly pig like creature. I am guessing your favorite past time is to suck and swallow your pap master cum.

Very good description of that pap beggar dog charazn.

 

[KNNBHCB]

I was just guessing from your lack of general knowledge that you have never done any project, audits or even purchasing before. Now I'm sure of it. In any project or audit even purchasing a service or product in corporate environment, payment is not made until after the thing is being signed off by one or both parties. If its a physical product, you sign a delivery order, sometimes only the buyer signs off. If it is a project or in this case an audit BOTH sides have to sign off.

Obviously the person buying the service have to sign off to confirm that the service project have been completed according to the contract, the vendor also have to sign off to confirm that the completion of everything stated in the contracts. Some times if the project is big enough they are split into several parts and both parties will confirm the completion of each stage of the project and payment is made

If the project is not done in a satisfied manner, they can choose not to sign it off and withhold payment. Similarly if the vendor have signed off the contract and some items are missing U can sue them according to the terms stated in the contract. In this case it is the auditor side that refuse to sign off the audit because there was something wrong with it and they were not able to properly finish the audit

If they sign off to it the auditors can be held responsible if issues like fraud comes up at a later date. Best example is to refer to the old NKF and the on going CHC case.

Lan jiao lah, talk cock so much for fuck?

Chee bye, why talk about project and procurement?

You auditor or what?

Fuck off, go suck you master's dick and stop side tracking and messing up the issue. :oIo: :kma:

 

[BANNED]

Lan jiao lah, talk cock so much for fuck?

Chee bye, why talk about project and procurement?

You auditor or what?

Fuck off, go suck you master's dick and stop side tracking and messing up the issue. :oIo: :kma:

Nothing from him whenever PAP cockup?

PAP dog eat pineapple tart $, he diam diam.
PAP dog let mental case from Malaysia drive through causeway, he act blur.
PAP dog Desmond Quek multiple mrt breakdown, he blind cannot see.
PAP dog makan $ to buy Brompton bikes, he keep quiet.

WP issue? he can go on for days if not weeks.

I am ok if he is like samleong dog or wmulew dog who openly confessed to sucking up pap cum. but this fatfuck charazn still dare to claim himself as neutral? Neutral my cock ok. Might as well claim himself to be trim and fit.

 

[Leongsam]

I am ok if he is like samleong dog or wmulew dog who openly confessed to sucking up pap cum. but this fatfuck charazn still dare to claim himself as neutral? Neutral my cock ok. Might as well claim himself to be trim and fit.

I have always found him to be neutral. He is an asset to the forum.

 

[BANNED]

I have always found him to be neutral. He is an asset to the forum.

I always found you to behave like 没家教, still talk cock about upbringing.

 

[winnipegjets]

The WP can't even run the financial affairs of one town council.

You can imagine the mess the country would be in if they were in charge of the whole country.

Heaven help Singapore is these village simpletons ever gain power by some freak of nature.

The WP have not lost $100 billion of our reserves like the PAP has.

Any average intelligence individual can tell you that this is all hot air. Will the auditors or any PAP politicians or MND dare to claim that the WPTC has falsify the accounts or commit misappropriation of funds? None of them will. Why? Because all they can do is to create a false impression and then use the PAP press to do the work, hoping that gullible individuals will take in hook, line and sinker.

Residents of the WP wards know far too well this same old trick. They live there, they have seen the improvements, they have seen the better management of fees and they appreciate that their MPs are fighting against a giant that is doing everything, using public resources, to make life difficult for the MPs and indirectly the residents. Money that should be spent on the residents have to be diverted to respond to insinuations.

The residents of WP wards will spread the word around ...unless you stand for election there with your holy team, you can expect a solid trouncing of the PAP in this ward.