looking for a legal term

[Dendrek]

I believe the correct legal term is they dun fucked up.

[Kapadons]

Seems the manager was trying to make a sales related bonus at store B, so he took excess sales from store A and attributed them to store B. I have no idea of the legal term or if it is indeed illegal but it is sure to be highly looked down upon by whoever the higher ups are in this company.

[Slant]

quick question,
does anyone know the term for using money that has been paid into one store location, then taken by an employee without permission and used in another store. Nothing was removed from the store except the cash, and the same amount that was taken is replaced as sales in another store location ?

Not sure if I am making sense :S

Couple questions: Are we talking about two physically separate stores? What's their legal status to each other? Are they independent franchise owners? Is it a chain owned by a parent company? What do you mean "used" in another store? Used for what? To buy goods at that store or to pay for supplies for that store?

It all boils down to the legal status of those stores to each other, I guess.

[Goobadin]

If the two locations ate pegged by the same tax rates, (not sure if Uk has local sales taxes, or how charitable orbs work) then its not overly problematic. Since your stores run off donations and inventory will thus vary, its no different than viewing them as shared inventory stores. So, I doubt there's any illegality to the charity.

If the guy did ot to get bonuses etc, that'll be a different story. Obviously you're aware of the store comps so I'm sure they are too.

[PixelFox]

The bogus accounting resulting from this activity is probably fraud of some sort. It probably then depends on who the fraudulent accounting numbers are presented to. Is it company management, shareholders, or governmental regulators?

In the U.S., this sort of thing could put a large enterprise in violation of Sarbanes–Oxley which is intended to prevent companies from presenting data that does not accurately represent the financial condition of the company. Allowing employees to falsify location sales data is exactly the sort of thing it's designed to prevent/punish through requirements for information systems that prevent stuff like this, and accountability for the company officers who sign-off on the accuracy of their financial results.

[Deleted]

Couple questions: Are we talking about two physically separate stores? What's their legal status to each other? Are they independent franchise owners? Is it a chain owned by a parent company?

These are two separate stores several miles from each other, owned and operated by the same charity. The legal status I am unsure of.

What do you mean "used" in another store? Used for what? To buy goods at that store or to pay for supplies for that store?

example in Store A a customer would buy a Shirt, this money is handed to the manager who puts it in the donation box rather than put it through the till, then lets the customer leave Store A with the Shirt. This would happen multiple times a day throughout the week until the night before they are due to cover in Shop B, where they would remove all the money and take it home.

On the Day that they are due to cover for me, they would make sales through the till in Shop B as if a customer has bought something using the money from Shop A donation box. There is no customer in Shop B, just a sale as if there was one, no goods leave the store.

hope that clears it up a little.

Not too sure of the legal term, but what I'd call it is "time to look for another job".

Already am doing.

[Rotted]

The goods purchased never left the store, The money was not tilled in in location A, goods given the customer in Location A, the money then transported and tilled in Location B to make location B look like it is performing better than it actually would have been doing.

I work for two blokes in my home town, they own three shops between them. A camping shop, a beach shop and a toy shop. Sometimes we take a customer from one to another with goods from shop A to B and pay for it all at B.

We have small competitions or used to as a laugh, which shop takes the most money, end of the week, the boss's would buy a round of drinks and the staff from losing shop would be the ones to go pick them up, we started doing this more frequently 2/3 times a week and we turned it to the losing staff pays the tab (at the time any shop could take the monies easy depending on the weather).

However things got silly, instead of the above scenario when we walked a customer over to a shop and paid for it all in B. staff were making them pay for everything in A, including the stuff from B which was leading to pissed off customers, A) they didn't have the product yet B) The staff only knew the prices for most stock resptive to their own shop not the other two so people were being under or over charged.

furthermore, it got to the point where people where running to one shop, picking up what someone wanted and running back and tilling it in at their shop.

Some of the senior staff like me, we're allowed to carry some of the till money in our pockets and quick serve people if there are ques. And since its all in the same kitty, we can hop between shops to do it if needed. In the end a few of the lads we're taking money from B to serve, at the end of the day putting back in the float at B, but taking the money to their shop.

And the worst one we caught, we thought was stealing, the tills kept being under and we couldn't figure out why. It wasn't until one day we noticed till A was under by 30 quid, but till b over by 30 quid. Turns out this lad was going to till A taking the money out and putting it in B. The problem was he didn't know how to void off to correct the till (to make the cash match up to the stated takings of the end of day receipt) and when he was in shop B he was just throwing it in instead of ringing it in, because hes only a floater, not till staff xD

But yea in the end we stopped doing that game, harmless fun turned into stupidity.

Anyways that reply went on a little longer than planned xD

[Deleted]

<snip>

whilst that was all in good fun, I am having to deal with sales targets from the previous year when I was not with the company but the manager was inflating the sales figures, I am now under more and more increasing pressure to meet the targets that have been set by regional management, and I am missing them by a good 25% due to the historical actions of my manager, with no way of answering the questions to why I am missing them without them sounding like excuses. "The town centre was very quiet this week" or "there is a distinct lack of foot traffic coming into the store" will only be accepted by the area manager for so long.

[Wikko]

So how is this explained in the accounting exactly? If there's inventory leaving the Store A but no money coming in there.

[Alvito]

pretty sure embezzlement means that they gain the money for their own use, they do not gain anything out of it.

I am almost certain that my manager has been taking money from one store to use in my store to artificially boost the sales figure in the past before I started, this has meant that I now have hugely unrealistic sales figures to achieve this year. Trying to find the legal term so I can explain the drop in figures when and if I am approached by the area / regional management team to why I am so far behind compared to last year.

I would worry about figuring out if it really happened and have proof before you get jammed up on verbage. If you are going to accuse anybody of cooking the books you better be right. If you are going to accuse your boss of it you absolutely need to be correct.

[Deleted]

I would worry about figuring out if it really happened and have proof before you get jammed up on verbage. If you are going to accuse anybody of cooking the books you better be right. If you are going to accuse your boss of it you absolutely need to be correct.

Yeah, I know I need proof, there is no way I would start anything without evidence.

[alzoron]

If you're questioned on the matter it would probably be better to just explain what happened rather than try to use legal terms you're unfamiliar with.

[Alvito]

Yeah, I know I need proof, there is no way I would start anything without evidence.

It is all that matters. Once you have that you could call it anything you wanted and the proof is still the important part.