Employees swindle employer $100 000 through POS machines

13
2248

TWO Curechem Overseas employees were last week arraigned at the Harare Magistrates’ Court charged with prejudicing the company of $100 000 by charging people 5% for using the firm’s point-of-sale (POS) machines without buying any goods.

BY STAFF REPORTER

Perlagia Chinyemba (25) and Kelvin Chisera (32) were not asked to plead when they appeared before magistrate Barbra Chimboza, who remanded them to May 3 this year on $100 bail each.

According to the court papers, Chinyemba and Chisera were employed by Curechem Overseas, which deals in mining and agriculture chemicals, as cashier and driver respectively.

The State alleges the pair used the company’s POS machines to dispense cash and charged recipients 5% commission between December 21 last year and February 15 this year.

The alleged crime only came to light this month.

It is the State’s allegations that Chinyemba and Chisera would allow people to use the company’s POS machines and swipe for cash without buying anything from Curechem Overseas.

The State alleges during the relevant times, the duo would charge 5% for every transaction carried out and in the process pocket the proceeds. The pair’s luck ran out when the offence came to light following an internal audit, leading to their arrest.

According to court papers, the firm was prejudiced of $99 529.

Audrey Chogumaira appeared for the State.

13 COMMENTS

  1. Just a bit confused here as to how the firm was actually prejudiced- I swipe $100 and get given $95 ($5 goes to the accused) but my accopunt is debited $100 and the accused’s company account credited with $100.Am I right so far? So how is the company actually prejudiced? Indeed the accused committed some form of offence and their conduct was highly unethical but i still dont see the loss to the company. Or is there more than what is written in this article?

    • My point as well. Maybe the company is now saying were it that those deals were done for the company they would have benefited (co.) that much though it is unethical as you said. Company lost nothing unless they want to claim their till role paper only

  2. kkk they lost nothing, their case will crumble. Hapana nyaya apa its not a crimininal case unless the RBZ has some law to charge people for selling cash. Zvakangofanana nekupihwa cash kuchimbadzo

  3. The company was clearly prejudiced here. If you have $100,000 cash and someone replaces it with 100,000 RTGs then you would have been prejudiced because the 2 are not of the same value. Secondly, these guys pocketed an illegal commission of 5% using their employer’s resources, which in this case must have been withdrawn as actual cash from the company’s safe. It probably worked this way: Someone would trf $100 RTGs to the company, and these guys would take $100 actual cash from the company’s safe and give you $95 while they pocketed $5. Plain daylight robbery here..

    • Please explain further. What is 100 000 RTGS and if its not equivalent to $100 000 how much is it in US$

  4. I want to know why the driver was charged, what role did he play, I hate to say it but our journalists just scratch the surface of the story they don’t get to the bottom of it.

  5. in any case the company must give those guys some bit of bonus because they ensured safety of cash for the company in the event of armed robbery #promoting cashless transactions

Comments are closed.