Fraud Triangle free essay sample

Triangle is a significant device in looking to comprehend why individuals submit misrepresentation. In the assessment of any extortion case as per the Fraud triangle there are three significant components, weight, opportunity and justification. To delineate the importance of these three elements we can look at an ongoing misrepresentation case I. e. the South Carolina Hospitality Association. For this situation Rachel Duncan was the bookkeeper for South Carolina Hospitality affiliation, she is accused of the theft of assets and tax avoidance, as it were Ms. Duncan is said to have utilized her situation as a bookkeeper to take organization assets for her own advantage on further audit it is guaranteed that roughly $500,000 was stolen from the Hospitality Association of South Carolina. While trying to comprehend why Rachel Duncan submitted this misrepresentation we can inspect the case as far as the accompanying three elements: Pressure: This factor sees what causes or drives a person to submit extortion. We will compose a custom paper test on Misrepresentation Triangle or on the other hand any comparative point explicitly for you Don't WasteYour Time Recruit WRITER Just 13.90/page Albrecht demonstrated that these apparent weights can fall into the accompanying classifications, monetary, Vice, Work related or different weights. Anyway according to the HASC extortion case the weight that caused Ms. Rachel Duncan to submit misrepresentation was a blend of both Financial Vice pressures. On audit of the case it is accounted for that she stole monies so as to help her betting Problem along these lines her bad habit was her voracious betting issue and the money related weight was the way that she turned to false practices to take the assets from HASC so as to help her betting issue. Opportunity: In the extortion triangle opportunity alludes to the circumstances or environment that exists which makes it simple for a person to submit and cover misrepresentation. Albrecht recognized the control condition which takes a gander at regions, for example, the executives job , Management correspondence, Appropriate recruiting, and control exercises, for example, isolation of obligations, autonomous checks and so forth. For this situation opportunity can be seen by the accompanying: No isolation of obligations Rachel Duncan was the bookkeeper who was exclusively accountable for the bookkeeping capacities, in truth she was liable for nine financial balances as well as accused of the duties of having the option to compose checks, sign checks and furthermore make stores. By being accountable for every one of these procedures it put her in a solid situation to submit and cover misappropriation of assets from the HASC, had there been an isolation of obligations it could have forestalled the fakes except if there is plot. Absence of free checks to rehash the case Rachel Duncan was viewed as a believed worker accordingly she was given sole duty over the funds of the association. Anyway they were no free checks by her Boss Mr. Sponseller this could have discouraged the extortion, consequently a blend of significant levels of trust in Rachel Duncan by her supervisor joined with inability to freely check the exchanges expanded the open door as well as made it simple for her to submit misrepresentation. Employing to rehash this case it was noticed this was not the first run through the HASC experienced misrepresentation in quite a while of theft in reality preceding the recruiting of Ms. Duncan a previous representative likewise stole cash, it stands to address whether appropriate individual verifications were done before recruiting. On the off chance that they weren’t, at that point it was the initial step to making an open door for misrepresentation to happen. Along these lines a blend of each of the three variables combined with the elevated levels of trust gave the ideal climate to Rachel Duncan to submit and cover extortion. Legitimization This alludes to the reasons that fraudsters may use to legitimize why they have submitted misrepresentation as indicated by Albrecht it might run from reasons, for example, the accompanying: * The association owes me * I merit more It’s for a decent reason. According to this case Rachel Duncan defended by demonstrating that she never intended to damage or misuse anyone’s trust. Along these lines in the hour of submitting her fake exercises she would have contemplated to herself that nobody would be harmed and it was anything but a maltreatment of anyone’s trust. By continually defending along these lines, she would have stolen many thousands des pite everything accepting that nothing wasn't right. It was likewise detailed that her Boss Mr. Sponseller who set an incredible degree of trust in her in the end ended it all, so in audit there was a maltreatment of trust and somebody did in actuality get injured. In the HASC/Rachel Duncan case every one of the three components existed for this extortion to happen nonetheless on the off chance that they had the option to control the open door factor it might have been forestalled.