Theft of Company Property | Workplace Thieves | Detective Embedding in Affected Companies

In addition to corporate crimes committed by third parties, companies must contend equally with offences by their own employees. Statistics show that roughly half of all crimes against businesses are perpetrated by staff. Warehouse and transport theft, accounting and expense fraud, unauthorised secondary employment, and feigned illness all fall into this category — alongside the “plain” theft.

Employee monitoring is therefore a core area of expertise for our IHK-certified corporate detectives in Bremen. We identify the offenders and provide court-admissible proof of their actions: +49 421 3679 9066.

Sticky Fingers on the Job | Case Study from Our Corporate Detectives

A large dental practice, with specialists across various fields, employed eight dental assistants and four dental technicians. Over recent weeks, the dentists repeatedly noticed that gold had gone missing, prompting them to engage our corporate detectives in Bremen. All employees were long-term staff, whom they trusted, so no one was initially suspected.

Our Bremen detective team discussed the optimal approach with two of the dentists and practice owners. We recommended embedding a detective as a “new employee” in the practice. A female detective was hired to observe staff unobtrusively, build contacts, gain trust, and identify the culprit. She was in her early 30s with a youthful appearance (looking more like early 20s) and was introduced as a second-career trainee, allowing her to investigate both the practice area and the dental technician team. She was scheduled to start the following Monday.

Early Suspicions | Narrowing Down the Suspects

The detective — let’s call her Sarah — was presented to staff as a trainee and assigned to the dental technician team, where theft likelihood was highest (as later confirmed). In the first days, offenders rarely commit crimes in the presence of a newcomer, but our Bremen investigators are trained to gain trust quickly. On her second day, Sarah noticed a technician taking more gold than necessary while using the supply. Though he appeared to return the excess gold, he always ensured no one was watching.

The practice and our detectives agreed to check gold stocks each morning and evening. On Sarah’s second day, one gram was missing; by the fourth day, three grams. On Friday, Sarah decided to follow the technician as he returned excess gold.

Detective as Accomplice? Culprit Caught

When the technician went to return dental gold the next day, Sarah followed him discreetly and entered the storeroom shortly after him. She saw him pull his hand from his pocket, then he turned to her and pretended to be searching for the key to the supply cabinet in his pockets. Sarah feigned naivety, admired the stock of dental gold and casually remarked that it must be worth a lot of money. Without missing a beat the employee replied, “About €25 per gram.” With that specific knowledge, which roughly matched the black-market price, he made himself even more suspicious. The investigator and the suspect left the room together — but Sarah had noticed that the technician had not actually placed any gold in the cabinet.

The operation by our Bremen detective continued on Monday, and she again took the opportunity to follow the technician when he returned dental gold. As she entered the room he was withdrawing his hand from his pocket and she asked whether he was again looking for his key. He denied it and said he had already replaced the gold. Sarah confronted him, saying that he had not returned the gold the previous Friday either, because after their conversation they had both left the storeroom. The dental technician gasped for a moment and then suggested to our investigator that she could "help herself" too. He claimed to have the key to the supply cabinet and said that as a trainee she could surely use a few euros. If she did not “grass him up”, they could go into it together.

Investigation Outcome by Our Commercial Detective in Bremen

That alone had already incriminated the perpetrator, but to make the case watertight for any potential court proceedings our Bremen detective agency set another trap. Sarah pretended to hesitate but agreed to the accomplice role on the condition that the thief introduce her to his buyer, the fence of the stolen goods. She argued that if they were to do it together, she needed to know all the background. The workplace thief took a little time to consider and informed our investigator the next day that he agreed. Every Friday he met his buyer to sell the weekly haul; next time he would take Sarah along. What he did not suspect was that Sarah and the thief were watched on their way to the fence by a two-person detective team that documented the meeting. Although the investigators could not overhear the conversation between the fence, the thief and the detective, Sarah’s account of the discussion gained credibility because all previous circumstances fitted together logically when the two additional Bremen detectives observed the trip to the fence. During the meeting itself the buyer was furious that the thieving employee had involved a third person without asking: “What do I know about her? How do I know I can trust her?!” Nevertheless, he purchased the thief’s weekly gold.

After the appointment ended and the deployed detectives reported back to the operation management, Kurtz Investigations Bremen informed the clients of the events. The case could then be closed by the preparation of the investigation report. Based on this report the practice was able to dismiss the thief without notice and to claim damages.

Case-Specific Assistance — Also for You!

If you suspect that there is an employee in your company who is stealing from you or your colleagues in order to line their own pockets, please contact our competent and experienced detectives in Bremen: +49 421 3679 9066 or by email at kontakt@kurtz-detektei-bremen.de.

*Note*

To preserve the discretion and personal rights of clients and persons concerned, all names and places in this case report have been altered beyond recognition.