Donna Hogan, store manager of a shoe store, pleaded guilty to charges of stealing $71,128 cash from the business. This amount was accumulated from over 697 transactions over a period of 2.5 years. Hogan managed to use false refunds and receipts from shoes that were still in the store. She would then take the funds from the till where she spent it mostly on clothes. According to her psychiatrist, this was motivated by “depression and emotional disconnection”, however, the prosecutor argued it was fuelled more by greed. Of the stolen cash, Hogan repaid more than $61,000.
1) In over 2 and half years, Hogan’s fraudulent activity remained hidden, highlighting the business lacked a staff monitoring mechanism which allowed Hogan to repeatedly engage in fraudulent theft activity. An important part of an …show more content…
There should be “proper authorisation” which can limit the number of refunds able by a particular employee at a certain period which would have decreased Hogan’s ability to steal over $71,000.
1) The business should create a stronger document and record control as part of its return policy. A person who have no cash responsibility can check the pre-numbered cash documents (receipts, return slips) against the actual cash received and complete the accounting records. This eliminates the possibility for Hogan to fraudulently record cash receipts and would uncover Hogan taking the funds.
2) Separation of duties within the accounting equation where the same person does not have access or can do both tasks – initiating payments and another authorises the refund to check the validity of it. If not separated, this gives anyone access to cash at the till, increasing possibility of fraudulent activity. 3) Regular audits to account for the transactions within the store is crucial for small businesses who risk employees engaging in theft. This audit if regular can highlight
1) In over 2 and half years, Hogan’s fraudulent activity remained hidden, highlighting the business lacked a staff monitoring mechanism which allowed Hogan to repeatedly engage in fraudulent theft activity. An important part of an …show more content…
There should be “proper authorisation” which can limit the number of refunds able by a particular employee at a certain period which would have decreased Hogan’s ability to steal over $71,000.
1) The business should create a stronger document and record control as part of its return policy. A person who have no cash responsibility can check the pre-numbered cash documents (receipts, return slips) against the actual cash received and complete the accounting records. This eliminates the possibility for Hogan to fraudulently record cash receipts and would uncover Hogan taking the funds.
2) Separation of duties within the accounting equation where the same person does not have access or can do both tasks – initiating payments and another authorises the refund to check the validity of it. If not separated, this gives anyone access to cash at the till, increasing possibility of fraudulent activity. 3) Regular audits to account for the transactions within the store is crucial for small businesses who risk employees engaging in theft. This audit if regular can highlight