Client receipts and the property mandate
A fictional property manager receives rent and a separate deposit relating to an owner mandate. The ledger identifies the owner, tenant, property and nature of each receipt. A temporary company cash shortage leads a colleague to propose borrowing the deposit for office expenses and restoring it before the next statement. The actual mandate and money-handling requirements have not been reviewed, and the case supplies no consent authorizing that use. Another colleague says the internal ledger alone proves that every custody requirement has been satisfied. Students must distinguish the nature of the funds, accounting records and authority to use them. The scenario provides no universal rule that every jurisdiction uses one identical deposit scheme or account title, but it does not treat a company cash need as authority over client money.
1. What needs to be established?
Read the worked answer
Identify ownership or entitlement, the purpose of the receipts, the mandate, required custody controls and the supporting records. A ledger entry does not authorize unrelated company use.
2. How should the proposed transfer be handled?
Read the worked answer
Do not treat the cash shortage or promised later replacement as authorization. Apply the actual instructions and legal/professional duties, retain traceability and escalate any conflict or shortage through the responsible process.