09.02.2013 Views

Enron Corp. - University of California | Office of The President

Enron Corp. - University of California | Office of The President

Enron Corp. - University of California | Office of The President

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Andersen employees destroyed incriminating documents under the auspices <strong>of</strong> complying with<br />

Andersen's document retention policy.<br />

(e) Lincoln Savings/ACC. Andersen was also associated with this infamous<br />

fraud perpetrated by Charles Keating. In 84 and 85, Andersen improperly issued "clean" or<br />

unqualified audit opinions on the ACC/Lincoln financial statements. Those opinions were included<br />

in ACC/Lincoln SEC filings and helped Keating promote an illusion <strong>of</strong> prosperity that was used to<br />

market notes to investors. Thus, Andersen participated in the Charles Keating fraud that bilked<br />

investors out <strong>of</strong> over $500 million. In 92, Andersen paid $30 million to settle the securities fraud<br />

action. Andersen <strong>of</strong> course, did not learn a lesson from this experience. In fact, Partner Jay Ozer,<br />

a member <strong>of</strong> the Andersen audit team on Lincoln/ACC, went on to be a key Andersen auditor on the<br />

aforementioned Baptist Foundation <strong>of</strong> Arizona Scandal.<br />

920. <strong>The</strong>se cases demonstrate that for years Andersen has demonstrated a callous, reckless<br />

disregard for its duty to investors and the public trust. Andersen's conduct throughout this period<br />

displays an uncaring, calculated cost/benefit approach to ignoring fraud and improper accounting in<br />

its audit engagements. As the facts above indicate, Andersen is unrepentant and would rather pay<br />

hundreds <strong>of</strong> millions <strong>of</strong> dollars to settle these cases than actually rectify its improper behavior. In<br />

essence, Andersen considers compromising its integrity and getting caught allying itself with<br />

management's interests an ordinary and necessary cost <strong>of</strong> doing business.<br />

F. Andersen Disregarded Major Indicators <strong>of</strong> Financial<br />

Statement Fraud at <strong>Enron</strong> ("Red Flags")<br />

(1) Andersen Knew the Risk <strong>of</strong> Fraud Was Extremely High<br />

921. Andersen had direct knowledge <strong>of</strong> <strong>Enron</strong>'s improper accounting as alleged herein.<br />

Andersen also knew that the risk <strong>of</strong> fraudulent financial reporting at <strong>Enron</strong> was very high. In<br />

designing and carrying out audit procedures, pr<strong>of</strong>essional standards specifically require that auditors<br />

- 592 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!