United Development Funding IV fka UDFI

[Phaedrus77]

I’m basing that assertion on UDF’s response to the SEC.

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-18832-event-5.pdf

Grant Thornton signed up and then quit 2 months later before even starting its work. UDF didn’t go with KPMG, PWC or E&Y (could be they wouldn’t do it or perhaps they were too expensive, etc).

Paragraphs 21 & 24 in the link discuss EisnerAmper not starting the audit until the Wells notices were resolved

I assume the engagement letters typically cover the auditors, but perhaps the accusations against UDF were so egregious that the letter wasn’t enough. I mean, if the letter states that the auditors are relying on mgmt representations, etc, and mgmt is under investigation for outright deceiving the previous auditors (and there is a smoking gun), would a reasonable person conclude that Eisner’s reliance on the promises in the engagement letter was justified? Beats me.