CRR Case Summaries and Entity-specific Press Notices
The FRC publishes, on a quarterly basis, summaries of its findings from recently closed reviews that resulted in a substantive question to a company (‘Case Summaries’). In addition, it publishes the names of companies whose reviews were closed in the previous quarter without the need for a substantive question. No Case Summary is prepared for such reviews.
Case Summaries, which are available for cases closed in the quarter ending March 2021 onwards, are included in the table below. As, currently, the FRC is subject to existing legal restrictions on disclosing confidential information received from a company, the Case Summaries can only be disclosed with the company's consent. Where consent has been withheld by the company, that fact is disclosed in the table.
From March 2018 until March 2021, the FRC published the names of companies whose reviews were closed in the previous quarter but did not prepare Case Summaries. However, on an exceptional basis, specific cases may be publicised through entity-specific Press Notices, which can also be found in the table below.
The FRC’s reviews are based solely on the company’s annual report and accounts (or interim reports) and do not benefit from detailed knowledge of the company’s business or an understanding of the underlying transactions entered into. They are, however, conducted by staff of the FRC who have an understanding of the relevant legal and accounting framework. The FRC’s correspondence with the company provides no assurance that the annual report and accounts (or interim reports) are correct in all material respects; the FRC’s role is not to verify the information provided but to consider compliance with reporting requirements. The FRC’s correspondence is written on the basis that the FRC (which includes the FRC’s officers, employees and agents) accepts no liability for reliance on its letters or Case Summaries by the company or any third party, including but not limited to investors and shareholders.
Key
- Only a certain number of CRR’s reviews result in substantive questioning of the Board. Matters raised may cover questions of recognition, measurement and/or disclosure.
- CRR’s routine reviews of companies’ annual reports and accounts generally cover all parts over which the FRC has statutory powers (that is, strategic reports, directors’ reports and financial statements). Similarly, CRR’s routine reviews of companies’ interim reports will generally cover all information in that document. Limited scope reviews arise for a number of reasons, including those conducted when a company’s annual report and accounts or interim report are selected for thematic review or reviews that have been prompted by a complaint. In accordance with the FRC's Operating Procedures, for Corporate Reporting Review, CRR does not identify those companies whose reviews were prompted by a complaint.
- The FRC may ask a company to refer to its exchanges with CRR when the company makes a change to a significant aspect of its annual report and accounts or interim report in response to a review.
- Case closed after 1 January 2021 but performed under operating procedures that did not allow for the publication of Case Summaries.
- From the quarter ended June 2023, the FRC started identifying the auditor of the annual report and accounts, or the audit firm that issued a review report on the interim report, that was the subject of the CRR review. This information was also back-dated for closed cases publicised from the quarter ended September 2022. Cases marked N/A relate to those published prior to September 2022 or interim reviews that did not have a review opinion.’
Case Summaries
CRR Case Summaries and Entity-specific Press Notices (Excel version)
| Entity | Shoe Zone plc |
|---|---|
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 September 2023 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | Cooper Parry Group Limited |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | Consent withheld |
| Entity | Smiths Group plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 July 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | KPMG LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Springfield Properties PLC (3) |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 May 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | BDO LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Statement of cash flows We asked the company why the payment of deferred consideration relating to a business acquisition was classified as a financing activity in the consolidated statement of cash flows but as an investing activity in the parent company statement of cash flows. The company explained that this payment should have been classified as a financing activity in the parent company statement of cash flows as it relates to the settlement of a loan and agreed to restate the comparatives in its next report and accounts. As this related to a primary statement, we asked the company to disclose that the matter had come to its attention as a result of our enquiry. |
| Entity | TalkTalk Holdings Limited (3) |
| Balance Sheet Date | 29 February 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | Deloitte LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Deferred consideration for prior year acquisitions We asked the company about the classification of cash outflows in relation to the deferred consideration for prior year acquisitions. The company explained that it erroneously classified the payment within operating activities, rather than investing activities, and agreed to restate the comparative amounts reported in the consolidated cash flow statement in its next annual report and accounts. As this matter resulted in a change to a primary statement, we asked the company to disclose that it had come to its attention as a result of our enquiry. Investment in intangible assets and property, plant and equipment We queried the significant differences between the cash outflows in relation to investment in intangible assets and property, plant and equipment in the cash flow statement and the additions presented in the related notes. We closed the matter based on the company’s response and encouraged it to disclose an explanation should similar differences arise in future reports and accounts. |
| Entity | Tracsis plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 July 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | Grant Thornton UK LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | United Utilities Group PLC |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 March 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | KPMG LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Cash flow statement working capital adjustments We asked the company to explain how the working capital adjustment for trade and other payables in the consolidated statement of cash flows reconciled to movements in trade and other payables in the consolidated statement of financial position. The company provided a satisfactory explanation and undertook to enhance its disclosures to clarify what is included in changes in working capital in the consolidated statement of cash flows. Capitalisation of costs associated with regulatory price review programmes We asked the company to explain why it believed accounting for costs associated with regulatory price review programmes in accordance with IAS 16, ‘Property, Plant and Equipment’, was appropriate, and to clarify the unit of account for these costs and why the resulting asset was being depreciated over a five-year period. The company explained why it accounts for the costs in accordance with IAS 16, clarified that the costs were a separate asset and explained why they were being depreciated over a five-year period. The company explained that it had considered alternative ways of accounting for these costs and that they did not provide a materially different outcome to the chosen policy and accordingly, for this reason, we had no further questions for the company. |
| Entity | Victoria Plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 March 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | Grant Thornton UK LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Investments in subsidiaries We asked the company to explain the basis on which the investments in subsidiaries were not impaired, noting the significant impairment charges on consolidated goodwill and a customer relationship asset. The company confirmed that it had identified indicators of impairment, prompting a test for impairment, and that the calculated recoverable amount of the investments, exceeded their carrying amount. We observed that it would be helpful if the company included this information in its future accounts, to the extent material and relevant. |
| Entity | Wilmington plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 June 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | Grant Thornton UK LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Worldwide Healthcare Trust PLC |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 March 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Investment holding gains balance We sought clarification for a difference between amounts disclosed in the notes to the accounts for investment holding gains and asked how they could be reconciled. The company explained that the discrepancy in the ‘investment holding gains’ capital reserve balance was due to an oversight. It agreed to amend the presentation of the comparative information in the 2025 annual report and accounts with an explanatory note. Performance fee calculation We requested further details about the basis of calculation of the performance fee and the reason no performance fees were accrued or payable for the current and prior financial years. The company provided a satisfactory explanation and agreed to consider improving the narrative disclosure of the basis of the calculation of the performance fee. Overdraft balance in the financial instruments’ disclosures We asked the company to explain an apparent discrepancy between the amount of the overdraft balance disclosed in two different notes. The company acknowledged that there should not have been a difference between the amounts and agreed to amend the disclosures in the 2025 annual reports and accounts with a note to explain the prior period disclosure error. |
| Entity | Wynnstay Group Plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 October 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | Crowe U.K. LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Lease reclassifications We requested additional clarification regarding the additions to right of use assets and lease liabilities described as ‘reclassifications’. The company provided a satisfactory response and agreed to enhance the relevant disclosures in the next annual report and accounts by providing additional information about the circumstances giving rise to these adjustments. Climate-related financial disclosures We asked the company to include, in its future annual reports and accounts, a qualitative analysis of the resilience of the company’s business model and strategy considering different climate-related scenarios as required by s. 414CB, of the Companies Act 2006. The company undertook to provide this information. |
| Entity | YTL Utilities (UK) Limited |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 June 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | Ernst & Young LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | abrdn New India Investment Trust plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 March 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | March 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | KPMG LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Adriatic Metals PLC |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 December 2023 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | March 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | BDO LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Advanced Medical Solutions Group plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 December 2023 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | March 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | Deloitte LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Contingent consideration in business acquisitions We asked the company for further details of the methods and assumptions used in valuing the liabilities arising on contingent consideration in business acquisitions, and the sensitivity of the liabilities to changes in those assumptions. The company provided the relevant information and agreed to enhance the disclosure of contingent consideration liabilities in future annual reports and accounts. |
| Entity | AJ Bell plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 September 2024 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | March 2025 |
| Auditor (5) | BDO LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |