Before deciding to accept the engagement, there are some pre-engagement considerations that
need to be made. Before we dive into the type of client the attorney is, there are a few other
factors.
Any conflict of interest must be identified before accepting the engagement. If there are any
conflicts of interest, it can impact the accountant’s independence and objectivity.
"Before accepting an engagement, the forensic accountant should always compare the required
competencies against his or her portfolio of skills and resources." (Rufus et al., 2015) If the
accountant has less expertise in the required fields that the engagement requires, it could affect
the timeliness of completion and the accountant’s reputation could be jeopardized in the event
that they provide false or incorrect expert testimony.
Any red flags with the client need to be addressed. For example, if the attorney doesn't want to
pay in a timely manner, it may be better to require payment up front or set up a retainer before
accepting the engagement. If the attorney is jeopardizing the progress of the case by not providing
information/data in a timely manner, the risk of missing deadlines or jeopardizing your reputation
may not be worth taking the engagement.
It's all a matter of determining if the risk is greater than the reward. In order to accept this case, I
would require an hourly rate and a retainer to be paid up front. I would also reiterate the
importance of not rushing through the engagement to decrease the risk of overlooking any
pertinent information. I would also make sure to have an agreed upon work schedule so I don't get
overworked and/or overtired and overlook information needed to make an opinion on the case.
According to the ‘American Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ (AICPA) Code of Professional
Conduct there are certain ethical standards that must be followed by Clinical Public Accountants in
the United States while carrying out their professional roles and responsibilities. The members
need to act with dignity, competence, due care, and objectivity and maintain the confidentiality of
clients (AICPA). When it comes to the acceptance of engagements, professionals need to accept
and perform with objectivity and integrity. They need to act in an independent manner and accept
the engagements that they can perform in a diligent and competent manner. In the case of
Attorney Joseph Leslie, the acceptance of the engagement must be declined because he does not
carry out her work with honesty and integrity. For instance, he accepts only wealthy clients, which
sheds light on her discriminatory behavior. Similarly, he does not adhere to a proper professional
code of conduct as he makes his staff members work for excess hours and asks them to provide
instant information, although he does not follow these rules while working.
The key factors that must be taken into consideration while serving as an expert witness for an
accepted engagement include:
Ethical Standards – The attorney’s ethical practices need to be reviewed to ensure he is adhering
to the relevant guidelines and standards, such as moral judgement, while carrying out all the
responsibilities. It is essential to make sure that the white-collar crime cases are carried out in a
responsible and accountable manner by the attorney (Jenkins et al., 2020). d
Conflict of Interest – It is essential to conduct a thorough assessment to identify whether there is
the possibility of any conflict of interest due to the acceptance of the engagement. d
Professional Competence – Showcasing professional competence is of paramount importance that
must be given due consideration. In the case of Attorney Joseph Leslie, it is of critical importance
to make sure that the engagement is synchronized with the professional experience as well as
expertise of the AICPA member.
The case could have been accepted only if the attorney had been carrying out his fundamental
responsibilities in an ethical and professional manner. For accepting the engagement, proper
adherence to AICPA is crucial for its members so that they can effectively serve as the expert
witness. It is imperative to act in an ethical way and choose the case if it integrates relevant ethical
components such as objectivity, transparency, etc. (West, 2018). d
Factors to Consider in Accepting the Client
As an expert witness, there are several criteria to consider before accepting an engagement. These
considerations include the 'engaging attorney', known as the client, any prospective conflicts of
interest, their own competence and due care, the nature and scope of the engagement, and finally
the compensation (Rufus, Miller, & Hahn, pp. 49-51, 2014). It is important for the forensic
accountant to know their clients, as an expert witness the forensic accountant must be aware that
the attorney always has their client’s best interest in mind. In the case listed above, the attorney
does not seem to be honest, his practices are lacking as well. Conflicts of interest can arise for
forensic accountants either between themselves and the lawyer or between the lawyer and their
clients, and can impede objectivity and independence (Rufus et. al., p. 50, 2014). Forensic
accountants must ensure they have the competence to take on the engagement otherwise serious
consequences can occur, including loss of reputation and financial sanctions. The forensic
accountant’s knowledge of the nature and scope of the engagement goes hand in hand with
competence and due care. Without knowledge of the nature and scope it would be impossible to
know if the forensic accountant had the competence, and wouldn't have done their due care.
Finally, compensation must be within a proper range, otherwise it could be seen as bribery, and
must be written and agreed upon by all parties (Rufus et. al., p. 51, 2014). The risks of not
following these pre-engagement considerations could result in damage to the reputation of the
forensic accountant, malpractice claims, overconsumption of resources, and threats to competence
(Rufus et. al., p. 49, 2014). d
Circumstances to Accept the Case
Given the facts given about Attorney Joseph Leslie, I do not feel there would be any terms that I
would feel comfortable with accepting this engagement. The client has historically shown that they
put a heavy, stressful workload on their employees, as well as a history of demanding payments up
front but failing to pay employees or consultants in a timely manner. These are huge warnings that
could put myself, and my firm if I work with one, at risk. Not only would my reputation be
questioned, but the likelihood of future litigation seems high with this case. While all engagements
must have a written engagement letter which lists the forensic accountants’ conditions for the
engagement, it is just a contract in the long run. If the attorney were the breach the contract, it
could tie up more time and resources with a lawsuit to collect the payment due if the retainer was
consumed.
The textbook tells us that we need to measure risk and rewards when deciding on a client (Rufus
et al, 2015). This is the first step I would take in this situation. I understand that he has a
reputation of winning and that would help boost my reputation being part of it. I also understand
that since he only takes wealthy clients, I could see a sizable payday from this one case. If I do a
good job, it could also lead to other offers from Mr. Leslie for continuing work. However, I feel that
is where the rewards part ends. While I may have a sizable payday, it could take an extended
amount of time to get paid as he is not reliable in that sense. I also look at how he handles his
business. It appears he treats his staff and other consultants poorly. I feel this says a great deal
about his integrity and professionalism. If he is slow to provide information that I may need to put
together my opinion on the case, this could affect how I appear. I want to always appear
professional and complete my tasks in a timely manner but not having the raw data on time can
affect that. I may speak to any previous consultants that he has used to see what they may have to
say. I know they may not be able to tell me much due to confidentiality but if they are willing to
say, it is worth it in the end, I may consider.
In the end, I don't believe there is a way that I would accept this engagement. I would want to
achieve an excellent reputation and feel that being attached to Mr. Leslie might have the opposite
affect. A good payday is always a bonus but if it takes 6 months, a year for that to happen, it's not
worth it. He may be an excellent lawyer but I would also prefer to work with good, professional
people with high integrity.
Screening is a process used in all sorts of different situations to try to avoid undesirable outcomes.
In forensic accounting it is important to screen engagements before accepting or rejecting the offer. Screening
involves balancing the risk versus the reward. Risks include threats to compliance and/or competence,
overuse/overextension of resources, logistical issues, legal issues, while rewards include compensation, positive
reputation, and recognition. Despite the fact that Attorney Joseph Leslie is known for winning difficult white-collar
crime cases, which could provide a boost to my reputation, he is also known for pushing long work hours and
choosing only wealthy clientele who pay up front while still paying his own consultants in a timely manner, both of
which could damage my reputation and cause financial strife. Deciding whether or not to accept his engagement
means balancing the reward of being associated with a winning lawyer, with the risks of accepting that he doesn’t
take care of his consultants and only accepts wealthy clients. In addition to considering the engaging attorney, it is
also important to consider competence, due care, the nature of the assignment, and compensation. If I am not an
expert in white collar crime cases, I may not be the right forensic accountant for the job. My own skill set is
important to consider in the process of accepting an engagement. The nature of the assignment is relevant to
determine how easily I would be able to do my job - not in the sense that the job itself is easy, but in that I have
access to witnesses and data, travel isn’t extensive, there are not unusual risks or other special circumstances.
Compensation is important and establishing amounts and times of payment is essential (Rufus, Miller, & Hahn,
2015).
This is not a case that I would accept at all. The potential boost to my reputation of being associated with a
winning attorney does not outweigh the hit my reputation could take for being associated with an attorney who
doesn’t respect the time and work of his consultants and experts. Even if I were to ignore the treatment of those
he engages, I would need to know the details of the case to ensure that I am competent to serve as an expert
witness, as I would not engage myself in a case where I do not meet the criteria set forth for expert witnesses. I
would also need information on the nature of the assignment. I can not accurately gauge unusual risk or special
circumstances without it. Additionally, I would need compensation information, with specifics (as we’ve
established he doesn’t pay in a timely manner and demands many work hours). All that being said, my reputation
is very important to me, and I don’t see a situation where the reward outweighs the risk in this scenario.
If attorney Joseph Leslie wants to hire me to serve as an expert witness for a recently accepted
engagement, then there would be a contract that would need to be signed concerning some rules
and regulations. If he wants me to be an expert witness then he would have to pay me up front, a
set fee. One major red flag when it comes to deciding whether or not to accept an engagement
would be the pay and if the lawyer pays within a timely manner. “When lawyers ask experts to
keep their fees low because a case is “small,” the expert faces a magnified risk of not being paid.
Any time an expert feels uneasy about accepting a case, the expert will usually be well served by
trusting his instincts and declining the offer” (ExpertPages, 2022). The factors that I would consider
in deciding whether or not I would accept the engagement would be the amount that I would get
paid, how many days I would have to testify, and what specifically I would be testifying for or
against. Time is money and it is relevant that I be paid for expertise, training, and knowledge. I
would also have to consider what the expert final option is going to be, gather all the facts and
data that will support my opinion, check the list of any previous cases that this attorney has taken
to court and what the outcome was.
I would probably not accept this engagement because of the way that the attorney treats his
employees and his slow fullness to pay them. I would not trust testifying on this attorney’s behalf
because if he does not pay his workers in a timely manner, then I am quite sure that they have
some resentment towards him and they would not get me the evidence and supplies that I would
need to adequately be able to testify accurately and honestly. It seems that this attorney is very
greedy, and he would not be willing to pay me for what I am worth for testifying. Only if this
attorney were better to his employees, paid them on time, was not greedy, and did not push his
staff to work long hours, I might would consider accepting the engagement. Speaking from
experience, a person can only take so much and after working for so many hours you began to lose
focus and can overlook some important stuff.
Before accepting a new client, there are several factors that must play a part in determining the
best decision for you and the accounting firm. For starters, you must analyze the engaging
attorney. While Joseph Leslie may have won every “white collar” case he’s had, that doesn’t
necessarily mean he is good client to accept. An example of a bad client from our text states that if
an attorney has a reputation for expert abuse, such as demanding rush assignments, it is a red flag
(Rufus, Miller, & Hahn, 2014, p. 49). On the other hand, a good client shows respect to the expert
witness and does not rush the witness to provide results. Another factor that I would consider
before accepting this engagement is compensation. The prompt says that Leslie is known for not
paying his consultants and experts in a timely manner. Therefore, an expert witness should ask for
a retainer that is based on the nature of the case and the investment of time it will require (Expert
Pages, 2022). Also, it is wise to enter into a fee agreement with the lawyer to guarantee payment.
Fee agreements resolve any doubt about the basis for an expert’s compensation (Expert Pages,
2022). I would also need to have a meeting with the prospective client to make sure they are not a
professional liability to our accounting firm. This will involve consider asking for references from
attorneys, bankers and major vendors or customers, and possibly, a background check on key
members of the company’s management (Rood, 2013).
If I had to make a decision based on the details that have been presented, I would have to say I
would not feel comfortable accepting the engagement. There are noticeable red flags with the
engaging attorney that could hinder me from gathering sufficient evidence. While the client may
be forthcoming and want to cooperate as much as possible with the investigation, I personally
would feel rushed by the attorney because he just wants to win, but not give the time needed to
develop the case properly. Also, he hardly does any work himself, which proves he wants to
everyone else to do the grunt work, while he only presents the case. This behavior is not acting in
the best interest of the client, or the expert witness.
References
Expert Pages. (2022, September 21). 4 Ways That Expert Witnessess Can Protect Their Fees.
Retrieved from https://www.expertpages.com/library/4-ways-that-expert-witnesses-can-protect-
their-fees
Rood, D. K. (2013, July 1). Is this client the right fit for your firm? Retrieved from Journal of
Accountancy: https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2013/jul/20137770.html
Rufus, R., Miller, L., & Hahn, W. (2014, p. 49). Forensic Accounting. Pearson.
ExpertPages. (2022). 4 Ways That Expert Witness Can Protect Their Fees. Retrieved from:
https://www.expertpages.com/library/4-ways-that-expert-witnesses-can-protect-their-fees
Rufus, R. J., Miller, L. S., & Hahn, W. (2015). Forensic accounting. Pearson.
Rufus, R., Miller, L., & Hahn, W. (2015). Forensic accounting. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education.
Rufus, R., Miller, L., Hahn, W. d (12/18/2014). Forensic Accounting. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]].
Retrieved from vbk://9780133867534
Jenkins, J. G., Popova, V., & Sheldon, M. D. (2020). Monitoring the accounting profession under the
AICPA code of professional conduct: An analysis of state board of accountancy participation.
Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 39(3), 106742.
Professional Responsibilities. (n.d.). AICPA.
https://us.aicpa.org/interestareas/personalfinancialplanning/resources/practicecenter/professionalr
esponsibilities
West, A. (2018). Accounting Ethics (Including the Profession’s Code of Ethics and Commitment to
the Public Interest). Encyclopedia of Business and Professional Ethics, 1-5.
Rufus, R. J., Miller, L. S., & Hahn, W. (2015). Forensic Accounting. Pearson.
