"THE PROBLEMS WEREN'T SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH"

At least according to our local paper the problems/errors in Scott Hahn's two Financial Statements "weren't significant enough to pass the file over to the provincial court for legal action.". According to them this was the conclusion of both the "review" ie. MECAC and of the forensic audit. Fine, then let's look at the exact words of the August 11, 2015 Forensic Audit.


page 8

3.12 The Tri-Mach cheque was not charged to a shareholder loan account or to the petty cash account. Michael Hahn advised that he provided $1,751.50 in cash to Tri-Mach's petty cash fund as repayment for the cost of the signs. He advised them that he received the cash from himself, his wife, and their daughter, Cassandra.

3.13 Three invoices were prepared from Tri-Mach and addressed to Michael Hahn, Katherine Hahn and Cassandra Hahn. Tri-Mach's Controller advised that he prepared the three invoices at Michael Hahn's instruction. They were prepared outside of Tri-Mach's normal invoicing system and as such, they would not be recorded as revenue or a reduction of expenses in the company's financial records.

3.14 When asked to locate the electronic files to establish the dates the invoices were prepared, the Controller advised that he could not locate the electronic files, with the process made difficult as he did not recall their file names, and that they may have been created on a spare computer that is used by different employees as required. He also advised that their IT support person searched for the files and also could not locate them.

3.15 Each invoice includes handwriting by Michael Hahn that states "Pd Cash Oct 7/14". We asked the Controller, who maintains the petty cash on behalf of Tri-Mach, for records related to petty cash. We were advised that no records are maintained for "ins and outs" to petty cash and there were no postings through to the general ledger. Accordingly we have no documentation available from Tri-Mach to support the timing of the petty cash reimbursement, or verification that it occurred.


page 9

3.19 The way the signs were ordered by Michael Hahn and paid using a Tri-Mach cheque, combined with the purchase being "helping the kid out", does not demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of the requirements related to contributions in the Municipal Elections Act at the time the signs were purchased. Having three invoices dated October 1, 2014 and marked as paid October 7, 2014 is consistent with much more knowledge of the Municipal Elections Act.


page 10

3.22 We are unable to conclude whether Scott Hahn believes, or ought to believe, that the information on the contributors, as reported in the Amended Financial Statement is true. That is, whether the three family members actually contributed cash to Tri-Mach's petty cash in or around October 2014.

...............................................................................................................................


The Auditor's were very careful not to make any legal findings. For example it would not be appropriate for them to suggest that paragraph's 3.19 and 3.22 above could be indicative of a possible/potential fraud. When read carefully these last two paragraphs I believe are strongly suggesting that authorities with greater expertise, probably legal, should be examining the situation.


These above paragraphs are only dealing with the issue of the unreported signs in Mr. Hahn's Financial Statement submitted by the legal deadline. There are similar issues with his $962.76 worth of brochures also unreported in his original Financial Statement as well as with an Invoice with an unlikely date on it. This entire Forensic/Compliance Audit is on the Woolwich Township website. Click on the top left side where it says Council. Scroll down to 2014 Municipal Election and click on it. Then scroll down to Scott Hahn and you will see a date of August 27, 2015 on the left. Move across to the right to Compliance Audit Report and click on it. There you are.