Hani:
This is to respond your August 2, email that I promised that I would
respond to fully to. Fortunately, most of my responses are taken
from emails that you already have. So, you cannot claim ignorance
of the said facts.
Per my previous memo I indicated I would respond to you for what
you wrote below. However, you failed to mention that on Tuesday
August 1st you asked for the draft audit report and I informed you
that I have given you the reason why such is not possible because
Danilo Sanchez was now the one dealing directly with the external
auditors of the company without my knowledge and I only found out
through you. I informed you that in the absence of me reviewing
this important work papers and based on my professional judgment
as a CPA and CFE I cannot issue a draft report without reviewing
the external auditors work papers especially when I have a host
of findings pointing to the shoddy work done by these external auditors
that worked against the commission and its ability to carry out
its oversight function. In addition, I informed you that I cannot
part with my work papers uncompleted or not until the case is over
with, and that if you request copies that may be acceptable but
I am not the one to make copies as you very well know the guidelines
of copying papers over 50 which should be made by the person responsible
for making copies in the LA office. I explained to you the problems
that occurred on a GTEC audit that I was in Charge of here at the
CPUC when my Director attempted to change my work product without
leaving a trail. I resisted his attempt and this case later became
a court case 5 years later and it even appeared in the Wall Street
Journal and what saved me was the fact that I kept my work papers
intact!. With that type of experience here in the CPUC I told you
I am not going to take chances especially when you have engaged
in lies against my person. Who knows what else you and Danilo are
planning to do with my work.
In view of the above which will be supported below with my some
parts of my previous emails to you that clearly showed the cause
and the reasons why we cannot or do not have a draft right now as
partly explained above and it directly involves Danilo going behind
me and the other staff working on the Audit to deal directly with
the external auditors. In an unprofessional manner, Danilo is yet
to inform me of his contacts with them or what he have agreed with
the external auditors. Danilo actions, I find unprofessional and
with the intent to frustrate me on the audit I am working on as
it appears he is ganging up with the external auditor against me
to carry our his apparent retaliation that when an investigation
is conducted would all come out in the open.
So, I am not the one holding up either the draft report or the work
papers up, but that is between you and Danilo and who knows what
you plan to do with it when you lack the accounting or auditing
technical ability to even review it or understand it, unless it
is something mischievous that is what you want to do with it in
order to discredit me. This also follows the pattern that Ms. Dana
Appling Director HID the COMMENDATION I GOT FROM ME TILL TODAY.
WHY? WHY?
Anyway the following emails I sent to you clearly shows that the
issue is not with me in respect of the report and any other related
issue but with Danilo Sanchez and you, Hani Moussa.
In my email of Friday July 14, 2006 at 10:16 AM I specifically said:
“I have informed you that I cannot issue any draft report
as a professional without reviewing the CPA audit workpapers and
so far I have not heard from PwC about my request and the deadline
given to them has passed and it is now up to DRA management to deal
with the issue. I have repeatedly said I need to look at their workpapers
without this I will not be in a position to release any draft audit
report that would be acceptable.”
In another email from me to you on Friday July 14 at 10:54 AM I
said:
“Would appreciate it if DRA management would find out what
is holding staff up from getting the requested information from
PwC despite the fact that the Program Manager who may not have been
aware of the Auditing Standards guiding our review of the external
auditors work papers signed something we should not have signed
that puts DRA in a bad position. This can only be rectified by DRA
management and not me. As a CPA if I had been or other Commission
CPAs consulted or even if the Program Manger have read some of my
correspondence which he was part of the mailing in respect of the
review such an error would not have been made. It shows the seriousness
DRA management attached to this at that time and even now.”
In another email from me on the same Friday July 14th I said:
Hani:
I have informed you earlier this week and also this morning that
this would not happen until I review PwC workpapers and I also told
you that it is up to DRA management to do what they need to do to
get us the workpapers. Without the review, I cannot release any
professionally acceptable draft audit report. So, there will not
be any draft audit report on July 21, 2006. According to PwC they
even want me to review 2005 work papers first when I did my audit
on 2004. This issue was brought to DRA’s management attention
including your self, but nothing has been done about it. This was
verbally communicated to you and I do not understand why we are
wasting time on this again. Please that is my position as a professional
whose work product is expected to be professionally acceptable and
I did not mince words when I told you. I thought I could issue it
without it, but based on my records and the facts of this audit
I cannot until the PwC workpapers are reviewed. So, there is no
need to expect any draft audit report with this situation that Danilo
is fully aware of.
You are also aware of the fact that I would need to review 2 years
work papers and one year is about 54 binders and 2 years would be
about over 100 binders. So, it does not take much to know that the
draft audit report cannot be ready July 21, 2006 even if the review
commence today. To review over 100 Audit binders will take at least
a few weeks if not months. So, asking the impossible is a deliberate
attempt to retaliate and it would not work in this case. So, you
have my answer on this as there I will not be in a position to release
any draft audit report .
Nat Cole
In another email from me to you on Friday July 14 at 2:33PM I said
“Would appreciate it if DRA management would find out what
is holding staff up from getting the requested information from
PwC despite the fact that the Program Manager who may not have been
aware of the Auditing Standards guiding our review of the external
auditors work papers signed something we should not have signed
that puts DRA in a bad position. This can only be rectified by DRA
management and not me. As a CPA if I had been or other Commission
CPAs consulted or even if the Program Manger have read some of my
correspondence which he was part of the mailing in respect of the
review such an error would not have been made.”
I saw that the above was not even addressed because of the personal
vendetta that is in progress but truth will always prevail.
This shows that you do not know what you are asking for. Moreover,
you are the one that should have asked me at the time I sent in
my request. Or am I wrong to say according to the hints I got from
you it was DANILO THAT ASKED YOU TO DO IT IN THE FIRST CASE BASED
ON OUR SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS. Moreover, if you really think such was
needed, I think someone in your position would know that anyone
traveling would make plans ahead and do not wait until the day they
are to travel before they would book, buy tickets or make arrangements.
That is failure on your part that I cannot be held accountable for
and that is that or should we say Danilo’s part?.
Please note that this travel is not paid for by PUC and I deserve
my affairs to be confidential and disclosed to the extent necessary.
Please provide me the government code or DPA rules that require
that I provide such personal information to you at this stage. If
you provide me with such then I will consider providing such information
to you for review only but you cannot make a copy. So, please provide
me with the appropriate DPA rules or government code that gives
you the authority to ask for my personal stuff without it, then
I cannot. In addition, I have provided you with my written justification
In addition, there is no urgent issue involved in any proceeding
that management can point to for me except this is the continuation
of the discrimination and retaliation going on against me with Danilo
and please note that if I do not get to review the PwC audit work
papers nothing will be forthcoming that would be professionally
acceptable as I know you are not an auditor so you can be excused
on this. But that is the reality of things if management is saying
that I cannot go on vacation because of their inept attitude to
get PwC workpapers then we shall see. I have done what I can do
and I cannot do management’s work for them in getting the
workpapers. Hani you indicated that Danilo is talking to PwC about
my request etc. and so such is out of my hands. To say I cannot
go on vacation because Danilo’s failure to do his job is not
only wrong it shows a lack of care for staff welfare and I cannot
do anything about that. If Danilo would not do his job, as you said
he has been talking to PwC about it but he had not communicated
anything to me about such and I find that strange but thanks for
keeping me informed. This is his issue and I cannot be made to pay
a price on it, so I expect something to be done about that by management
before we can progress on this and this is clear. I will appreciate
your cooperation on this as soon as you can.
On the same Friday July 14 at 4:47 I said to you Hani:
“Here you go again not telling the truth! I now think these
issues call for an investigation because it was not me that was
supposed to review the workpapers in the first place, but what you
said below seems to indicate that and that is another falsehood”.
...
________________________________________
From: Moussa, Hani
Sent: Wed 8/2/2006 3:46 PM
To: Cole, Nathaniel; N Cole
Cc: Sanchez, Danilo E.; Walker, Cynthia
Subject: RE: Nat - Requested Documentation Upon Return To LA Office
Nat,
Per our discussion yesterday (Tuesday, Aug. 1st) afternoon about
the four items listed below that I requested you provide upon your
return back to the LA Office.
(1) Doctor's Note - You showed me your doctor's note for your absences
of July 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, and 25th but failed to provide me a
copy per my initial request. We discussed the matter with Pamela
Gavin-Watts and she advised that you should provide a copy of your
doctor's note to her for your personnel file. I discussed this matter
again with you this afternoon and we agreed that you'll attach a
copy of your doctor's note to your July 2006 timesheet. Pamela Gavin-Watts
is also aware of this and in agreement.
(2) Draft Audit Report - You failed to provide the draft audit report
per my request.
(3) Copy of all the work you have done on this audit assignment
- You failed to provide a copy per my request.
(4) Vacation request for July 26-28, 2006 - You failed to provide
documentation supporting that your travel plans are nonrefundable
and when you booked the tickets.
Hani.
________________________________________
From: Moussa, Hani
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 3:56 PM
To: Cole, Nathaniel; 'N Cole'
Cc: Sanchez, Danilo E.; Walker, Cynthia
Subject: Nat - Requested Documentation Upon Return To LA Office
Nat,
It's my understanding that you have been out of the office this
week (July 18 - 21, 2006) on self sick leave. I hope you're feeling
better and able to return back to work next week. Please provide
the following upon your return to the office:
(1) Doctor's note for your current absences
(2) Draft Audit Report per my Memo dated July 14, 2006
(3) A copy of all the work you have done on this audit assignment
per my e-mail dated July 14, 2006
(4) Vacation request for July 26-28, 2006 - Documentation supporting
that your travel plans are nonrefundable and when you booked the
tickets per my e-mails dated July 14 & 18, 2006
Hani.
|