Case Study | Corporate Theft | Oil Manufacturer |
Employees are the fuel that drive success in a company, but what happens when employee theft stalls the corporate engine?
Corporate Theft | The Case
Employees are the fuel that drive success in a company, but what happens when employee theft stalls the corporate engine?
Lauth Investigations International was called upon to investigate suspicions of theft within a local oil manufacturer. An equipment manager had voiced concerns about unusual gas spillage near the valves where employees filled the tanks for distribution. The manger told their superiors they believed an employee had been siphoning off gas from the refinery and had been selling it out of his home.
The Investigation
Lauth Investigators first had to determine if there were environmental factors that were effecting the valves.
Lauth Investigators first had to determine if there were environmental factors that were effecting the valves. Using risk-management criteria, it was determined that there were no leaks in the valves and they were in perfect working order. Next, investigators had to determine if human error might have been responsible for the spillage. Procedure for filling gas tanks involved the use of a hose which would prevent spillage. Undercover, investigators entered the refinery during operation hours to observe employees filling tanks. After surveilling daily operations, it was determined the alleged theft must be taking place outside of operation hours. Investigators placed hidden cameras trained on the target tanks in hopes of observing the theft. Footage from the hidden surveillance cameras revealed that an employee was, in fact, using an improper technique to fill cannisters with gas from the targeted tanks. The investigator visited the Subject’s residence and identified the same gas cannisters on the Subject’s property.
The Solution
Lauth prepared a report indicating that the Subject identified filling gas from the cannisters was the suspected employee, as well as the gas cannisters observed at the Subject’s home.
The report contained the conclusion that the Subject was siphoning gas and transporting it back to their residence to sell privately. At this stage of the investigation, the client did not wish to go further with the investigation in order to establish a link between the improperly filled cannisters and the cannisters at the Subject’s home. Lauth’s recommended solution was the termination of the employee.