A loss prevention professional needs to know how to stop shoplifters, but a major contributor to shrink at a retail establishment is employee theft, and as such, a true loss prevention professional should know the basics of identifying internal theft. Here are some tips to help you identify internal theft.
Refund Fraud thrives in a system that allows refunds to be processed without complete customer information and/or a receipt. The most common method is for the employee to take merchandise from the store floor and “return” it, using fictitious customer information. Most fraudulent returns are either missing information and/or do not have receipts.
A company policy that allows “no receipt refunds” needs to be monitored closely because this is where the most criminal opportunity exists. If a customer does not have a receipt, he or she should be required to provide full information such as name, address, phone number and reason for return, including picture identification before a refund is given. A follow-up phone call should be conducted, especially on returns involving higher priced items. This “customer service” call is necessary in detecting suspicious refunds. It serves to verify whether or not the customer purchased the merchandise in the first place and whether he or she actually returned the merchandise for a refund. This action also provides management with an opportunity to find out why the customer returned the goods and whether the service received was adequate.
Management often allows a slack refund policy because they are afraid of inconveniencing the customer. To counter, the rationale for enforcing a stricter no-refund policy is that legitimate customers usually have receipts and on the odd occasion where they do not, they feel that the store is doing them a favor by processing the refund in the first place.
At the same time, it should be noted that not all refunds with receipts are necessarily legitimate either. Nor are you immune from refund fraud if your store has a “no receipt, no return policy”. Though it may be a little more difficult, it is not impossible for an employee to keep or find a legitimate customer receipt from an earlier transaction – especially in a store that sells consumable items such as a grocery or liquor store.
In stores where it is logistically feasible, having refunds issued by a customer service department and not the cashier practically eliminates the problem of refund fraud caused by the cashier acting alone. Collusion with an outside party or coworker at the Service Desk certainly still remains a possibility.
Some other suggestions for curtailing refund fraud involve keeping track of refund totals each month and investigating any fluctuations in amounts of refunds and returned expensive merchandise. Next, do not allow a single person to process a refund, always have a second signature on the refund slip – preferably a senior employee or manager. Granted that this doesn’t prevent an employee from forging a second signature out of laziness, convenience or theft; however, with some awareness training, it does serve as a good deterrent. Educating the employees about accountability, theft and consequences also goes a long way in prevention. It does cause them to think twice about faking a signature when they are aware that forgery is a crime regardless of the circumstances and they will be held accountable for their actions.
The red-flags of Retail Fraud are:
Discount Abuse is the result of an inadequate employee purchase system that doesn’t properly monitor employee purchases. To avoid abuse of the system, spending limits should be put in place. All employee purchases should be kept track of at head office on a centralized system. This is especially important in a multi-store environment where employees can make purchases at a variety of locations.
Discount abuse can manifest in a variety of ways. For example, an item can be purchased at one store, via staff discount, and be returned [no receipt] at another store for a full price refund by a friend or the employee acting as a customer. Another method is to purchase goods at the discounted price and sell them to friends etc. at a lower price than retail. Though this abuse can happen even with spending limits in place, it at least puts a limit on how much can be stolen via this method. Without employee spending limitations put into place, a lucrative business opportunity exists for dishonest employees.
Sweethearting occurs when an employee rings in a sale at a lower amount than the item is priced. The best prevention is to not allow employees to process discounts from their cash register without a Manager or Cash Supervisor’s overriding the system using a confidential code.
Another problem that exists in this area is the cashier ringing in a code for one item and bagging another. For example, an apple is rung-in and a steak is bagged. The only way that this will ever be caught is through surveillance. A time-lapse video camera above the cashier will serve as a deterrent to criminal activity by the cashier, not to mention it also is a useful investigative tool which could be used to match the time of transactions to what was rung in on the register. The camera will pick up the customer purchasing a television, for example, at 2:00 p.m. and when the cash register tape is checked, the only transaction at this time was for a pillow – thus a case is established.
Vendor theft typically accounts for 6% of shrink and will involve always involve an employee somewhere. What most employees don’t realize is how theft can be disguised as an innocent act. What appears to be a simple gesture of goodwill or kindness, rapidly escalates into either a partnership of equal opportunity or blackmail where they feel powerless to do anything but continue to comply with the vendor’s wishes.
The following six questions that provide us with telltale signs regarding whether or not a particular employee is a risk candidate for Vendor advantage. It’s not that any of these acts themselves are crimes, or even wrong, though each of these things do allow the opportunity for manipulation.
Another method Vendors use to con an employee is to ask for a favor, which will appear like a harmless enough gesture to comply with. For example, the Vendor may ask the employee to break a rule by letting the delivery occur after hours, with some lame excuse attached. In another circumstance, the Vendor may ask the employee to store a package for him at home or ask the Employee to pick up something for him, not sign the bill of lading or sign an incorrect bill. Often the Vendor will set up little tests for the prospective employee to see whether or not he/she can be lured, such as telling them that they can have a certain damaged item, that the company doesn’t want damaged merchandise back and it would just go into the garbage anyway. The thing to remember is that it’s just a ploy to get the employee to compromise ethical standards.
Awareness training for employees and managers, along with a “receiving” policy would curtail this activity. The Awareness Training should include what to do when a Vendor approaches you with an out-of-the-norm request, along with information explaining motives and methods used by corrupt Vendors. The key is to get employees to step back and consider the logic or reasoning behind questionable requests. Why wouldn’t a company want damaged merchandise back? They need to keep track of their inventory and could sell the damaged merchandise at a discount or send it back to the manufacturer. Second, the employee needs to understand the consequences of his actions. There really is no such thing as bending the law, you either commit a crime or you don’t. Even if a crime is disguised, it is still a crime and you can be held accountable, lose your job and be charged.
Cash Register Tampering covers a wide area of fraud. Some of the most common methods of tampering include altering the transaction tape [by cutting out transactions and either rejoining the register tape or starting a “new” roll], false voids, paid outs, and overages and shortages.
Prevention involves both loss prevention personnel and management keeping track of, and investigating any irregularities that occur. When looking at cash shortages, inspect transactions from the previous year or two and determine the number and amount of average shortages that have occurred in each particular store. Scrutinize large variances and compare them with store sales. If the variances occurred during a period when the store was extremely busy, the “human error” excuse could be legitimate. Furthermore, these averages can be used as a benchmark for determining the “normal” amount of shortages for each store and time of year. Always look for patterns.
Do not fool yourself into thinking it’s a waste of time following up on a $2.00 shortage. You can check back a few days later and see if it turned up or make a note of who worked that day, time and cash register. Keeping up with shortages on a daily or weekly basis not only helps you remain informed as to what is going on in the store, it also saves you a lot of background work later if an investigation is initiated.