Achievements this week:
1. Drafted a professional recommendation for Duncan Karcher to ask data from square trade for auditing Purposes. We did receive the data from square trade to the same affect which had all the data fields requested.
2. Queries posed by Devin at Square trade were analyzed and answered. He wanted to basically make sure that that the data that we have requested and the data they provided were same. After analyzing we came to the conclusion that that his confusion were basically based on the fact that that the data we were looking as a sample was drafted out of PCMI which essentially was not the same as the column header from Square trade Data.
3. Had another meeting with Howard Rudolph. This was to analyze the data provided …show more content…
Next step to this was to draft a proposal for square trade and ask for additional data fields that are necessary for the audit. Different steps were identified in this meeting and the particular artifacts that we would require to inspect were laid out.
5. 23 checks that have been returned to us were posing a problem for our accounts payable as checks lying in their department more than 4 months are subject to inspection. The issue was alleviated by a handover procedure suggested by me to void all those checks and let BWG take over and issue these checks from their end. This made the procedure faster and easier for Both AP and BWG as a lot of data was being shared back and forth between the Vendor Company and Starr, which was leading to significant time loss.
6. Simon Michellepis wanted to call for a meeting to discuss reconciliation of PCMI data in advance of call with Square Trade at 3 pm, Friday 10/9/2015. He asked me to set it up and invite senior management. This was taken care of.
7. I am also working on an extract and comparison of GWG Litigation Data for our Starr Counsel, Ross Chinitz. This requires me to compare data that have about 2 million records with. This is basically done to legitimize and segregate data that was insured by us and the ons that were insure by Fortegra. The files include historicasl data from 2009 to
1. Drafted a professional recommendation for Duncan Karcher to ask data from square trade for auditing Purposes. We did receive the data from square trade to the same affect which had all the data fields requested.
2. Queries posed by Devin at Square trade were analyzed and answered. He wanted to basically make sure that that the data that we have requested and the data they provided were same. After analyzing we came to the conclusion that that his confusion were basically based on the fact that that the data we were looking as a sample was drafted out of PCMI which essentially was not the same as the column header from Square trade Data.
3. Had another meeting with Howard Rudolph. This was to analyze the data provided …show more content…
Next step to this was to draft a proposal for square trade and ask for additional data fields that are necessary for the audit. Different steps were identified in this meeting and the particular artifacts that we would require to inspect were laid out.
5. 23 checks that have been returned to us were posing a problem for our accounts payable as checks lying in their department more than 4 months are subject to inspection. The issue was alleviated by a handover procedure suggested by me to void all those checks and let BWG take over and issue these checks from their end. This made the procedure faster and easier for Both AP and BWG as a lot of data was being shared back and forth between the Vendor Company and Starr, which was leading to significant time loss.
6. Simon Michellepis wanted to call for a meeting to discuss reconciliation of PCMI data in advance of call with Square Trade at 3 pm, Friday 10/9/2015. He asked me to set it up and invite senior management. This was taken care of.
7. I am also working on an extract and comparison of GWG Litigation Data for our Starr Counsel, Ross Chinitz. This requires me to compare data that have about 2 million records with. This is basically done to legitimize and segregate data that was insured by us and the ons that were insure by Fortegra. The files include historicasl data from 2009 to