December 11, 2018

Why Is Everyone So Tight-Lipped on the Ventas EY Audit Partner Situation?

As we found out recently, the engagement partner at EY was (probably, allegedly) banging the (now former) Chief Accounting Officer and Controller at the client (Ventas). Well, we don't know if they were necessarily getting it on at the client's but you get the idea. Due to that "inappropriate personal relationship," Ventas fired EY — although it may have been better form for EY to resign instead of telling the client "BTW we think one of our people was fucking one of your people" but hey, that is neither here nor there.

Since that news came out, we've been trying to flesh out the truth (cringeworthy pun totally intended).

First, an "inappropriate personal relationship" could mean anything. Maybe they are on the same roller derby league. Maybe their kids were once caught smoking pot behind the 7-11 together. Maybe they power walk through the suburban wasteland together each morning before dawn. Lots of things can impair independence, it doesn't necessarily have to be banging. I mean, it probably is banging, but it doesn't have to be.

From the beginning, we knew one participant was a male but what about the other? It very well could have been a dude but I guarantee you had that been the case, these two wouldn't have been able to keep their "inappropriate personal relationship" under wraps for long.

So here's the odd thing. A few people have given us a name but not much more than that. When pressed for more details, our sources buttoned up again.

One, who claimed to work on the engagement with her (SPOILER ALERT: it's allegedly a her) offered to give us any details we needed but when asked if others knew this was going on and if they were, in fact, fucking, balked and told us "I can't confirm any of that and don't want to mislead." Well gee, thanks.

Here's what we do know: all of our skiddish sources have given us the same name. That person's LinkedIn and Facebook profiles which both identify her as a partner at EY were mysteriously missing the day the news release came out, though search results for those profiles remain on Google. Clearly, this person did a good job of disappearing off the face of the Internet ahead of the announcement. We also know that this person was fired.

And that's it. The odd thing is, you guys are usually really good about spilling the beans because you have nothing better to do but gossip all day but in this case, no one wants to talk. Why is that? Is this former partner a dual agent for the CIA or something?

Come on, one of you has to be able to verify this. Until then, it just doesn't feel right to potentially ruin this woman's life because a handful of you sent us tips with her name and zero evidence. I just find it hard to believe the partner was literally screwing around with the client and none of you feels compelled to spill your guts.

We'll be waiting.

Related articles

Grant Thornton and the Antichrist

al pacino_devil.jpgIt’s rather mysterious that the New York office of Grant Thornton is located at 666 Third Ave. As I’m sure our more pious readers know, the significance of the 666 is commonly known as “The Number of the Beast“. We won’t get into any more specifics than that other than to mention that it is a pretty creepy-ass looking number.
Is G to the T run by a secret group of Al Pacino-esque figures that are working against the forces of good?
Maybe not but the otherwise boring-assness of that particular lobby is def working too hard to not be noticed…