
Syndicate 1225 For the year ended 31 December 2024
7
Independent auditor’s report to the members of syndicate 1225
continued
Responsibilities of Managing Agent
As explained more fully in the managing agent’s responsibilities statement, the Managing Agent is responsible for the
preparation of the syndicate annual financial statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view, and for
such internal control as the Managing Agent determines is necessary to enable the preparation of syndicate annual financial
statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
In preparing the syndicate annual financial statements, the Managing Agent is responsible for assessing the syndicate’s
ability to continue in operation, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to the syndicate’s ability to continue in operation
and to use the going concern basis of accounting unless the Managing Agent intends to cease the syndicate’s operations,
or has no realistic alternative but to do so.
Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the syndicate annual financial statements
Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the syndicate annual financial statements as a whole are
free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor's report that includes our opinion.
Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs
(UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are
considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic
decisions of users taken on the basis of these syndicate annual financial statements.
A further description of our responsibilities for the audit of the syndicate annual financial statements is located on the FRC’s
website at: www.frc.org.uk/auditorsresponsibilities. This description forms part of our auditor’s report.
Extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud
Irregularities, including fraud, are instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations. We design procedures in line with
our responsibilities, outlined above, to detect material misstatements in respect of irregularities, including fraud. The extent
to which our procedures are capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud is detailed below.
We considered the nature of the syndicate and its control environment, and reviewed the syndicate’s documentation of their
policies and procedures relating to fraud and compliance with laws and regulations. We also enquired of management,
general counsel and internal audit about their own identification and assessment of the risks of irregularities.
We obtained an understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks that the syndicate operates in, and identified the key
laws and regulations that:
had a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. These
included the Insurance Accounts Directive (Lloyd’s syndicate and Aggregate Accounts) Regulations 2008 and the
Lloyd’s Syndicate Accounting Byelaw (no. 8 of 2005), the Lloyd’s Syndicate Accounts Instructions; and
do not have a direct effect on the financial statements but compliance with which may be fundamental to the
syndicate’s ability to operate or to avoid a material penalty. These included the requirements of Solvency II.
We discussed among the audit engagement team including relevant internal specialists such as actuarial and IT specialists
regarding the opportunities and incentives that may exist within the organisation for fraud and how and where fraud might
occur in the financial statements.
As a result of performing the above, we identified the greatest potential for fraud in the following areas, and our procedures
performed to address them are described below:
Estimation of pipeline premiums requires significant management judgement and therefore there is potential for
management bias through manipulation of core assumptions. In response our testing included, on a sample basis,
comparing management’s estimates on prior year policies against actual premiums received as well as to historical
experience on similar policies.
Valuation of technical provisions includes assumptions and methodology requiring significant management
judgement and involves complex calculations, and therefore there is potential for management bias. There is also
a risk of overriding controls by making late adjustments to the technical provisions. In response to these risks we
involved our actuarial specialists to develop independent estimates of the technical provisions and we tested the
late journal entries to technical provisions.
In common with all audits under ISAs (UK), we are also required to perform specific procedures to respond to the risk of
management override. In addressing the risk of fraud through management override of controls, we tested the
appropriateness of journal entries and other adjustments; assessed whether the judgements made in making accounting
estimates are indicative of a potential bias; and evaluated the business rationale of any significant transactions that are
unusual or outside the normal course of business.