The till that came up €21 short
It is Saturday the 14th and Maria is the only supervisor on duty in a six-till supermarket; the store manager leaves at 21:30. Till 2 opens at 08:00 with a float of €150.00.
At 13:40 the card terminal loses its connection for about 20 minutes. Cashiers follow the offline procedure and the terminal reconnects at 14:05. During the day till 2 records cash sales of €1,058.40, card sales of €2,731.15 and cash refunds of €34.50, plus one voided transaction of €18.75 and three 'no sale' drawer opens.
At 21:10 the drawer is counted twice. The second count, which includes a €20 note found under the removable tray, is €1,152.90. The Z-report confirms cash sales of €1,058.40 and cash refunds of €34.50.
Inside the drawer Maria finds a refund slip for €21.00. The trainee on till 2 says she 'gave the customer the refund in cash but put it through as a card refund', because the queue was long and the supervisor key was not nearby. Maria has to sign the cash-up sheet before the manager leaves.
1. Reconcile till 2. Show the arithmetic, state the variance, and explain what the evidence suggests.
Read the worked answer
Step 1 - expected cash in the drawer. Float €150.00 + cash sales €1,058.40 − recorded cash refunds €34.50 = €1,173.90.
Step 2 - actual cash. Verified second count = €1,152.90.
Step 3 - variance. €1,152.90 − €1,173.90 = −€21.00, a shortage.
Step 4 - test the variance against the evidence, do not jump to 'theft'. The drawer contains a €21.00 refund slip, and the trainee states she paid that refund in cash while keying it as a card refund. That explains the whole shortage exactly: €21.00 physically left the drawer, but the POS never subtracted it from expected cash, so the expected figure is €21.00 too high. The €20 note under the tray was inside the second count, so it is not an additional cause - had it been excluded, the shortage would have been €41.00 and would have needed a different explanation.
Step 5 - cross-check the card side. Because the refund was keyed as a card refund, the POS net card figure is €2,710.15 (€2,731.15 − €21.00), while the terminal batch will show the full €2,731.15. A terminal report that is exactly €21.00 higher than the POS card figure confirms the mis-key and rules out a cash loss.
Step 6 - confirm the refund was genuine. Check the refund slip for a signature, the original sale reference and the returned item, and confirm the goods went back into stock. A legitimate mis-key is a training and control issue; an unsigned refund with no goods is a different matter.
2. What should Maria do before she signs the cash-up sheet, and what must she not do?
Read the worked answer
Before signing
- Record the variance and its explanation on the cash-up sheet in writing - expected €1,173.90, counted €1,152.90, short €21.00, reason: €21.00 refund paid in cash but keyed as card.
- Attach the €21.00 refund slip and a short signed statement from the trainee, with the time and the till number.
- Print the terminal settlement report and compare it with the POS card total; note the €21.00 difference on the sheet as confirmation.
- Verify the refund was valid: signature, original sale, returned item back in stock.
- Ask the manager to co-sign the sheet and countersign the explanation before leaving, and hand over the slip and statement to the cash office.
- Raise a back-office journal correction for the next working day so the card and cash totals in the accounts match reality.
- Record it as a training and control issue, and arrange a short refresher on refunds for the trainee.
What she must not do
- She must not put €21.00 of her own money in the drawer to 'balance' it. That hides a control failure and becomes a disciplinary matter.
- She must not sign a sheet showing a nil variance that is not true.
- She must not remove or bin the refund slip, or leave the drawer uncounted.
- She must not accuse or embarrass the trainee on the shop floor; the discussion belongs in the office with the manager.
- She must not alter a completed POS transaction herself without authorisation - corrections go through the manager and the back office.
- She must not leave the cash-up for someone else to 'sort out' after the manager has gone.
3. Identify three control weaknesses this shift revealed and give one specific change for each.
Read the worked answer
Weakness 1 - the supervisor key was not accessible, so refunds bypassed authorisation. The trainee's reason for the wrong keying was that the supervisor key was not nearby. Change: move the refund authorisation key to the till point where the supervisor is based, and make the rule explicit - no refund is processed until a supervisor is physically present, with the queue managed by opening another till or calling for backup.
Weakness 2 - refunds were keyed to the wrong tender with no second check. The POS accepted a card refund while cash was handed over. Change: build a two-step confirmation into the refund routine - read the tender back from the screen and state the amount aloud before completing - and require the supervisor to sign the refund slip, not just approve it on screen.
Weakness 3 - the cash-up depended on a single person and an unexplained variance was found only at the end of the day. The count was done twice, but by one person, and the discrepancy had to be reconstructed rather than seen. Change: two-person counting with both signatures on the sheet, plus a mid-shift spot check of till 2 on any day with more than three refunds or a terminal outage.
Additional weakness worth noting - the offline procedure. There was no written offline routine at the till, so staff improvised. Change: a laminated card at each till covering offline card handling and which transactions must be deferred to the supervisor.