Maintaining proper records means tracking activities and recording info AT THE TIME for future reference. How do you figure that OP can go back in time and make sure the records were done correctly before they joined the company? If info was not recorded correctly, how can OP fill in gaps?

My point was that he should have looked over the previous months info. It is his/her job to review and double check the previous employees work in case there is a issue with anything. If there is no problem great. If there is he can't bring the problem to his boss and then handle the issue.

Actually, it isn't anyone's job to review and redo all the work of previous employees in their same position. It's the BOSS's job to make sure employees are performing well, and perhaps an auditors job if the boss isn't capable. You are hired to do a job, not to do the job of everyone who worked before you. That's an amazing way of scapegoating whoever is the newest employee. I hope you get hired by a 70 year old firm and spend your days re-checking the work of the past 7 decades just to make sure everything was done correctly. Because, you know, otherwise it's your fault.

I'm with Phoenixchick on this one. If something comes up where you're made aware of past discrepancies, then by all means you should try to fix them. But to expect new employees to actively search through past files to make sure their predecessors didn't screw anything up is madness.

What if the person that OP replaced had deleted said data and told everyone it want important, so the company had deleted it?

I would still review the current year I the previous year on a big company and 2-3 years on a smaller company so your covered for an audit

Although op isn't at fault for the missing data, he should have at least tried to get a hold of it and or brought it up with his superiors that there was missing data. If he was in charge of maintaining data bases he should have realized they weren't 100% complete. You have to see it as a magnate looking down at the problem. Something has come up in a particular department that's on grounds for investigation. How can this have slipped by? Op isn't the only one at fault. At high it's the company's fault. Then the department head, as well as his manager's. It trickles down until they find someone to fire or reprimand for publicity sake.

@18: Actually, in a lot of departments (like for example legal or financing) it IS your job to be able to present all current and past documents. For example, in a lot of countries companies have to save all financial documents for the past five years (number of years can be different, depends on country) for tax services for example. So it IS in fact part of your job to make sure past data is in order, even if it means you have to go through previous employees crap. Do you really expect one manager to do this? What if several people leave at once? Your legal or finances department would be so backed up, it would take months if not years to catch up...

That's exactly what I thought when I read this FML.

Just because it was a mock audit, doesn't mean the note should be disregarded. It still means something was out of order and should be handled before the real audit happens.

No, it isn't. Responsibility lies with the job function, not the person. The note was sent to this person, because this person is currently in charge of this. They can't really send a note to the one who did it before, can they. In an audit, something like this doesn't mean "you didn't do a good job", it simply means "this data is currently not in order, you need to get it in order". And since it's a mock audit, why would you get anyone fired over this? If you suggest firing everyone who was responsible for failing an audit, a LOT of people would be out of a job. You'd be surprised how many companies don't have their sh*t together. It's the whole reason audits exist.