Replies to post #201966 on Dewmar International BMC Inc (DEWM)

[HATTER]

Yes, Thorne. We discussed this in detail.

The Medworx money was flowing into DEWM...

The feds came in and seized all sorts of money, but did NOT target DEWM.

That was the FIRST reason that the audited fins were delayed. That was the reason MB walked away.

There is a different reason this time.

[NoMoDo]

I don't know anything about Medworks, but I read the entire context of the filing. It says in a nutshell, that the internal controls of the company were not stringent enough for MB to put their name on it.

Seems to me that they were at an impasse. Marco wanted them to file a qualified audited report; MB wanted to delay until they spent time and money enough to be sure. By GACP standards, the auditor is required to fully investigate any matter that MAY change the outcome of the audit before it signs off. Lets not make this a murder mystery. That was the cause of the delay. The reason for the departure was that neither side would budge - nor should they. MB would be required to mark the audit as unqualified unless and until they did a thorough investigation and cleared DEWM of any potential wrongdoing. DEWM didn't want to pay for something they felt unnecessary.

From the legal perspective, 17 CFR 229.304 states that DEWM would either need an auditor to investigate the matter or go with unaudited financials for a period of 2 years. DEWM eventually had the new auditor investigate and found... cue the murder mystery music... nothing:

New Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


On April 28, 2017, the Company’s Board of Directors appointed BF Borgers CPA PC (“BFB”) of Lakewood, Colorado as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the Company’s fiscal years ending December 31, 2015 and 2016.


During the fiscal years ended December 31, 2014, 2015 and 2016 and the subsequent interim period ended April 28, 2017, neither the Company nor anyone acting on its behalf consulted with BFB regarding: (i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction either completed or proposed or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on the Company’s financial statements, and neither a written report not oral advice was provided that BFB concluded was an important factor considered by the Company in reaching a decision as to the accounting, auditing or financial reporting issue; or (ii) any matter that was either the subject of a disagreement between the Company and its predecessor auditor as described in Item 304(a)(1)(iv) of Regulation S-K or a reportable event as described in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K.