An audit is being carried out into the accounts of UCD’s Law Society. According to docu- ments seen by the College Tribune, ed the investigation is being carried out after concerns were raised by UCD Societies Officer, generic Richard Butler, about the “manner in which the Society officers conducted their financial af- fairs in the last session.”
In an email to current LawSoc auditor, Francis McNamara, dated 8th July 2001, Butler wrote “I have been giving significant thought to the situation regarding the accounts of the Society… I have now decided that a full audit of the accounts will be necessary, during which time the accounts will be fully reviewed.” Mr Butler claimed that such an audit would rec- oncile “the actual financial situation of the Society” and “result in a proper financial structure being put in place for the Society for the future.
“The final results of the audit may also indicate that further action is required, either by the Society or the University.”
In the email, forwarded to the College Tribune by an anonymous source, the Societies Office expressed particular concern about the accounts relating to the LawSoc centenary dinner, which was held in O’Reilly Hall last February. The Societies Office has appointed an accountant from Price Waterhouse Coopers to investigate Law Soc’s finances and made it clear to LawSoc that “the Auditor and Treasurer, as well as the junior Ex-Auditor and Junior Ex-Treasurer, and whatever former Auditors as may be necessary make themselves available.”
The email also pointed out that “procrastination and prevarication will be dealt with severely.”
In a correspondence between the accountant from PWC and LawSoc on 10th July, to a former auditor who is not longer a student and is now a legal advisor to the society, the accountant stated that the Societies Office “wasn’t happy with the presentation of LawSoc’s accountants for the year, in that the final figures changed a number of times since the AGM.” The email went on to say that Mr Butler and Mr McNamara “have asked me [the accountant] to take a look at the 100th Session’s accounts and re-state them in line with the best account- ing practices (a “mini-audit” would be one way to look at it.)”
In a subsequent email from the Societies Office to
LawSoc dated 12th July, the Societies Office said they saw “no need to expand the pool of ‘need to know,’ or to provide the university student media or the rumour machine with information that they have no need of, especially when there is no particular suggestion that the audit will do any more than tidy up a slightly confused situation.”
There is some discrepancy withMrMcNamara’sofficial account of the investigation which took place, with the auditor repeatedly stating that it was in fact a “restatement of accounts”.
In an official email to Mr McNamara, dated 8th July 2001, Mr Butler stated, “I have been giving significant thought to the situation regarding the accounts of the Society… I have now decided that a full audit of the accounts will be necessary, during which time the accounts will be fully reviewed, corrected and reconciled with the actual financial situ- ation of the Society.” Butler claimed that such an audit would reconcile “the actual financial situation of the Society” and “result in a proper financial structure being put in place for the Society for the future.”
