Tech Forum

It is wonderful that auditors can now see check images as well as signature card images via LUFAS. However, they can only see one version of the signature card, the last one signed. If someone on the signature card is released, and another person sustained during the audit period, the auditor can no longer see the old signature card. That makes it difficult to verify signatures on the checks that were signed prior to the signature card change.

It would be good to submit this through feedback so that someone can see it and determine whether that is an appropriate change to make.

When you pull up the copy of the check, the signature card(s) appear beneath it. If there's more than one, the earlier ones are visible by scrolling farther down.

As auditors, are we supposed to be verifying signatures on checks? I don't believe I've ever received instructions to do such, and have never done it in audits I've conducted.

There was a point, and that point may have been 2-3 years ago, when a revision of the audit forms asked the auditor to compare the signatures by asking the clerk to access LCR. Maybe a week after the forms were made available, the message came down that checking the signature screen (by the clerk) resulted in the auditor being signed off of LUFAS. Thus, it wasn't ready for primetime, and the requirement was pulled. Now that LUFAS 5 gives the auditor the ability to check it, I'd expect it to be a formal requirement for mid-year 2019 audits. It's not a bad idea to check any payments directly to the bishop to make sure he wasn't signing them.

• Was every check signed by two authorized people, neither of whom was the payee or the person being assisted?
• Was every check signed by two authorized people who were not related to the payee or to the person being assisted?