Skip to content

| CCH Central Suite |

Welcome to the Feedback Forum for the CCH Central Suite of products. This area is for you to have your say on product enhancements or improvements that you’d like to see in future releases of the software. Enter your product idea to see and vote on related ideas or add your own idea for other customers to view and vote on.

First, enter your idea to see if it already exists.  If it does exist, click the ‘Vote’ button and select 1, 2 or 3 votes.  You have a maximum of 15 votes per product area .


This site is for product suggestions and ideas only. If you have a product query, please use the search bar on the Support Portal
home page to locate answers from our software documentation and knowledge base.  You can also use the orange Chatbot button on the homepage to request additional support.

| CCH Central Suite |

Categories

JUMP TO ANOTHER FORUM

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

7 results found

  1. Redesign of the Audit notes system - needs more integration with the general interface so that it is more obvious there are new or outstanding audit notes.

    Perhaps some sort of live notification/inbox in the bottom system bar of the software window (where the login, date/time is located)

    5 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. Currently users have to click Check Out and then click Edit.

    Can the Edit button automatically check the document out?

    7 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. In many countries, audit files are subject to review by external regulators like The Institute or the Audit Oversight Boards.

    In previous borland database version, there is a possibility to give audit file to the reviewer for a particular client and for a particular year as a backup. This is the secured practice to give access to external reviewer to that extent he or she required.

    However, in the updated version, you can not restrict external reviewer to the required year. If you give access to reviewer to the client, he or she can access previous years without any permission.…

    12 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. An option of entering date in working papers manually rather than auto filling of date based on system date will be helpful for the firms in presenting it audit files to regulatory reviewer. Reason behind is that sometimes firms have to issue audit report on some back date on the insistence of client despite the fact that audit work was performed on current dates and in current scenario it not possible to provide any justification to regulatory reviewer regarding the date issue.

    7 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. At present, the pension master pack does not incorporate the same chart of accounts as Accounts Production. This means that figures have to be posted seperately into each, and cannot be transferred directly between the two. The Charity master pack was recently updated to reflect this.

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. Despite this supposedly being an integrated system, I have been informed it does NOT use the lower section specific materiality (when this has been included). All that is does it to note the lower section specifically materiality under the performance materiality so you have the option to adjust if you wish.

    We therefore need, on every job where there is a lower section specific materiality to manually adjust the performance materiality (in the sample calculator) which needs to be calculated as the section materiality divided by risk factor for that area.

    It would be better if system automatically used the…

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. Include an extra column in the PAR routine to show the % difference with the preliminary TB as well as the final TB.

    As the comments made at planning stage will not be upto date as updates are made to the final TB figures

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Don't see your idea?