Our agency was approached by the sales staff of a private grocery store: part of the takings was regularly disappearing from the safe. Theft at work is not rare, but this story affected everyone: until the thief was found, the whole team was under suspicion.
A Narrow Circle
Every evening the shift supervisor put the takings in the safe. The amounts were small — 10,000 to 20,000 rubles a day — and the money accumulated and was handed in once a week. That was when the shortfall came to light. Only two people had access to the safe: the store director and the shift supervisor. The director was in no hurry to look into it, so the staff decided together to turn to private detectives.
An Unexpected Version
We started with the circumstances and the backgrounds of the employees. The profile of the likely thief did not match any of the sales staff, which gave us grounds to look further. The circle of suspects seemed narrow, but our experience tells us never to rule out even the most unexpected versions.
For two weeks the detectives kept watch. The cleaner came into view. She was not officially employed at the store, had a spotless reputation and had long remained above suspicion. But it turned out that she lived with a man who had previously been convicted of theft.
A Key Impression
After that, the picture came together. The cleaner made an impression of the safe keys and gave it to her partner, who had a duplicate made. While she was cleaning the director’s office, her accomplice took part of the takings — carefully, a little at a time, waiting a week between thefts so as not to arouse suspicion.
Never rule out even the most unexpected versions — the culprit may be the one who stayed above suspicion the longest.
The Outcome
We handed the evidence to our clients, and the culprits were held accountable. The thefts stopped, and trust returned to the team: the staff learned that the money had been taken by outsiders, not by one of their own.
If Money Goes Missing at Work
The main thing is not to accuse anyone at random: suspicion without facts destroys a team faster than the thefts themselves. It is worth checking who has access to the money and keys, who is in the premises outside working hours, and whether any new people have appeared around the staff. If there is no answer, an outside view is needed.
This case shows that a detective is needed not only in personal matters. Shortfalls and thefts at work are our job too: facts clear the innocent of suspicion and point to those who are really guilty.