Before accepting an engagement there are various pre-engagement factors to
consider. These include: the engaging attorney (the client), conflicts of interest,
competence and due care, nature and scope of the assignment, and compensation.
The first factor to consider is the client (attorney) as attorneys are advocates for their
clients. Sometimes an attorney can “…sacrifice an expert’s reputation to advance
their clients’ cause” (Rufus et al., 2015, p. 49). Due to this, it is important to be
aware of any red flags an attorney may show (reputation for unethical practices,
expert abuse, nonresponsive, slow or no payment). A good client would respect the
expert witness’s role, display proper communication, and be prompt on payments.
Another factor, conflicts of interest, takes into consideration objectivity and
independence. It is important there are no conflicts of interest. Competence and due
care are where the forensic accountant should review what is required of them to
ensure it aligns with their specialized skills and knowledge. They should also be
able to meet any deadlines given. If this cannot be done, it may not be in the best
interest to accept the engagement. Along with ensuring they are knowledgeable
about the requirements, it is also essential to understand the nature and scope to
make sure the expert can complete the task in terms of data, witnesses, and travel.
Lastly, compensation should also be considered. How much, when, who is making
the payment, what fees are associated, and any other issues need to be considered
and discussed. “Retainers should be collected before work begins and should be
replenished when depleted” (Rufus et al., 2015, p. 49). Once all factors are
considered and the forensic accountant decides to accept the engagement, an
engagement letter should be sent and signed to ensure the client understand and
accepts the forensic accountant’s conditions.
Going through the above factors, I personally would not accept this case. The
client is giving off many red flags. First, Attorney Joseph Leslie is showing a
reputation for expert abuse where he rushes staff and demands long work hours. The
contradiction is that they do not hold themselves to the same standard. They also
have a reputation for not paying consultants and experts in a timely manner. These
two red flags alone cause concern for the potential for other issues. Will requests be
responded to in a timely manner? Will a retainer be paid? Will the expert’s opinion
be sacrificed just to advance the client’s cause?
Reference
Rufus, R., Miller, L., & Hahn, W. (2015). Forensic accounting. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson Education.
