Our application of materiality and an overview of the scope of our audit Materiality for the consolidated financial statements as a whole was set at £7.93million, determined with reference to a benchmark of group total assets of £792.6 million, of which it represents approximately 1.0% (2022: 1.0%). In line with our audit methodology, our procedures on individual account balances and disclosures were performed to a lower threshold, performance materiality, so as to reduce to an acceptable level the risk that individually immaterial misstatements in individual account balances add up to a material amount across the consolidated financial statements as a whole. Performance materiality for the Group was set at 75% (2022: 75%) of materiality for the consolidated financial statements as a whole, which equates to £5.9million. We applied this percentage in our determination of performance materiality because we did not identify any factors indicating an elevated level of risk. We reported to the Audit Committee any corrected or uncorrected identified misstatements exceeding £396,000, in addition to other identified misstatements that warranted reporting on qualitative grounds. Our audit of the Group was undertaken to the materiality level specified above, which has informed our identification of significant risks of material misstatement and the associated audit procedures performed in those areas as detailed above. The group team performed the audit of the Group as if it was a single aggregated set of financial information. The audit was performed using the materiality level set out above and covered 100% of total group revenue, total group profit before tax, and total group assets and liabilities.
Going concern The directors have prepared the consolidated financial statements on the going concern basis as they do not intend to liquidate the Group or the Company or to cease their operations, and as they have concluded that the Group and the Company’s financial position means that this is realistic. They have also concluded that there are no material uncertainties that could have cast significant doubt over their ability to continue as a going concern for at least a year from the date of approval of the consolidated financial statements (the ‘going concern period’). In our evaluation of the directors’ conclusions, we considered the inherent risks to the Group and the Company’s business model and analysed how those risks might affect the Group and the Company’s financial resources or ability to continue operations over the going concern period. The risks that we considered most likely to affect the Group and the Company’s financial resources or ability to continue operations over this period were: ‒ Availability of capital to meet operating costs and other financial commitments; ‒ The ability to successfully refinance or repay debt; and ‒ The ability of the Company to comply with debt covenants; We considered whether these risks could plausibly affect the liquidity in the going concern period by comparing severe, but plausible downside scenarios that could arise from these risks individually and collectively against the level of available financial resources indicated by the Company’s financial forecasts. We considered whether the going concern disclosure in Note 2 to the financial statements gives a full and accurate description of the directors’ assessment of going concern. Our conclusions based on this work: ‒ we consider that the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of
‒ we have not identified, and concur with the directors’ assessment that there is not, a material uncertainty related to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the Group and the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern for the going concern period; and ‒ we have nothing material to add or draw attention to in relation to the directors’ statement in the notes to the consolidated financial statements on the use of the going concern basis of accounting with no material uncertainties that may cast significant doubt over the Group and the Company’s use of that basis for the going concern period, and that statement is materially consistent with the consolidated financial statements and our audit knowledge. However, as we cannot predict all future events or conditions and as subsequent events may result in outcomes that are inconsistent with judgements that were reasonable at the time they were made, the above conclusions are not a guarantee that the Group and the Company will continue in operation. Fraud and breaches of laws and regulations – ability to detect Identifying and responding to risks of material misstatement due to fraud To identify risks of material misstatement due to fraud (‘fraud risks’) we assessed events or conditions that could indicate an incentive or pressure to commit fraud or provide an opportunity to commit fraud. Our risk assessment procedures included: ‒ enquiring of management as to the Group’s policies and procedures to prevent and detect fraud as well as enquiring whether management have knowledge of any actual, suspected or alleged fraud; ‒ reading minutes of meetings of those charged with governance; and ‒ using analytical procedures to identify any unusual or unexpected relationships.
the consolidated financial statements is appropriate;
Picton Property Income Limited Annual Report 2023
Powered by FlippingBook