On-site, remote or desktop review: choosing the right audit
Not every client needs an auditor in the building every time. Matching the kind of audit to the client gets you better evidence for the risk you actually carry, and keeps the audit diary affordable.
On Business Audits · 19 August 2026 · 5 min read
Most financiers audit every client on a fixed cycle, often with the same kind of audit each time. It is simple to run and easy to explain. It also means the riskiest clients get the same attention as the safest, and some audits answer questions nobody was asking.
There are three kinds of audit to choose from. Each has a job it does best.
On-site audit
An auditor visits the client’s premises, meets the people who run the ledger, and works through the records there.
What it adds: you see the business. Is there stock in the warehouse that matches the sales? Are the people you were told about doing the jobs you were told about? How does the credit controller actually chase? An auditor on site can ask a follow-up question the moment an answer doesn’t fit, and can ask to see a document straight away rather than days later.
When to choose it:
- a new client’s first audit after funding;
- a client whose last audit found significant issues;
- a client with high exposure, rapid growth, or a change of ownership or systems;
- anything you are worried about that you can’t put your finger on.
Remote audit
The same tests, carried out from documents the client sends: ledgers, bank statements, invoices and their proofs, management accounts. The auditor speaks to the client by phone or video.
What it adds: most of the evidence of an on-site audit at lower cost, with less disruption to the client. Testing invoices against delivery notes, reading bank statements and finding contras all work just as well from documents.
What it misses: what you only learn by being there. That includes the state of the premises, the stock, and the people, and the documents a client didn’t send because nobody knew to ask for them.
When to choose it:
- an established client with a clean history, between on-site visits;
- clients a long way from the auditor, where travel would dominate the cost;
- a focused follow-up on one issue from the last audit.
Desktop review
A lighter review of the monthly information the financier already receives: the aged debtors report, the management accounts, bank statements, and the client’s own reporting. There is no sample of invoices tested against paperwork.
What it adds: a regular look at trends between full audits, at a fraction of the cost. It is good at spotting a ledger ageing badly, a rise in credit notes, Crown arrears building, or a gap between the ledger and the management accounts.
What it misses: anything that needs the underlying documents. A desktop review won’t find pre-invoicing or a short delivery. It is a monitoring tool, not a substitute for an audit.
When to choose it:
- low-risk, low-exposure clients between audits;
- to decide whether a client needs a full audit sooner than planned.
Match the kind of audit to the risk, not to the calendar.
A simple rule of thumb
Put each client into one of three groups, using what you already know: exposure, history, and how much has changed.
| Group | Typical client | A sensible pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Watch closely | New, large, growing fast, or with past issues | On-site at each audit, with a desktop review in between |
| Steady | Established, mid-sized, clean history | Alternate on-site and remote audits |
| Low risk | Small exposure, long clean history | Remote audit, with desktop reviews between |
Revisit the groups after every audit. A clean result can move a client down a group, and a finding should move it up straight away. The pattern is a starting point, not a rule, and your facility terms or credit policy may set minimums.
Changing the plan between audits
A plan set at the start of the year should move when the facts do. Signs that a client needs a full audit sooner than planned include a sharp rise in credit notes, debtors ageing faster than sales are growing, Crown arrears appearing, late or changed monthly reporting, and a new debtor that suddenly dominates the ledger. A desktop review is a good way to catch these, which is much of its value.
What the choice doesn’t change
Whatever the kind, the report should cover the same things in the same order, so clients can be compared and a client compared with itself. Findings should become action points either way. And the kind of audit should be written on the report, so that a reader knows how the evidence was gathered.
Questions to settle before booking
- What is the exposure, and how has it changed since the last audit?
- What did the last audit find, and has it been put right?
- Has anything changed at the client: systems, people, ownership, customers?
- Is there a specific worry that only a visit can answer?
If the answer to the last question is yes, book on-site.