An unexplained invoice, a stock discrepancy or a payment that does not match the expected record can be difficult to explain in a first conversation. Start by organising what you know into a timeline. The aim is to make the question clear, not to build a narrative that assumes someone is guilty.
This guide offers a practical way for Kenyan business owners and managers to prepare a fraud enquiry. A timeline is an organising aid; it does not establish fraud, identify responsibility or guarantee recovery of a loss.
Chat with LY on WhatsApp with a short general description of your concern.
Start with the discrepancy, not a suspect
Describe the difference between what you expected and what the available records show. Identify the transaction, process or period that needs clarification. Avoid treating a missing approval, unusual entry or incomplete record as proof of intention.
A useful opening question is: “Which part of this transaction cannot currently be reconciled?” That is more precise than “Who stole the money?” when the underlying facts have not yet been established.
Use one event per timeline entry
For each relevant event, record the following in a simple table or list:
- Event date and time: when the event occurred, if known.
- Date discovered: when you became aware of it; this may be different.
- Neutral description: what the record or direct observation shows.
- Source reference: the document or system record supporting the entry.
- Status: supported by a record, reported by someone, or still unverified.
- Open question: what needs clarification.
If a time is approximate, label it as approximate. If two records show different dates, keep both and note the difference. Do not silently choose the date that best fits an assumption.
A short fictional example
Fictional demonstration — all details below are invented and are not an LY case.
- 3 September: Invoice A was received for an order. Source: retained invoice. Open question: whether the stated quantity matches the order.
- 5 September: A payment appears in the business’s own payment record. Source: Payment Record B. Open question: which approval supports it.
- 8 September: A reconciliation identifies a difference between the invoice and delivery record. Source: Reconciliation Note C. Open question: whether a partial delivery or later adjustment explains the difference.
The example shows a sequence and unanswered questions. It does not establish a false invoice, an unauthorised payment or responsibility for wrongdoing.
Keep a separate document index
Give each relevant item a neutral reference and explain what it is. Note who holds the original, the period covered and any known gaps. Reference the item from the timeline instead of inserting long message threads or full document contents into every entry.
For initial preparation, use records your business is authorised to hold and review. Retain the originals as received and keep working notes separate. Do not alter records to make them consistent, access another person’s private account or obtain passwords and verification codes.
Separate observations from explanations
A staff member’s explanation may be relevant, but record it as an explanation and identify its source. A direct observation, a document entry and something reported by another person should not be presented as interchangeable evidence.
Include relevant information that could point to an ordinary mistake, a delayed posting or an incomplete delivery. A useful brief makes competing explanations visible rather than leaving out facts that complicate the first suspicion.
Prepare five points for the first consultation
- The process involved, such as purchasing, stock handling or invoicing.
- The period covered by the concern.
- The specific discrepancy you want clarified.
- The types of authorised records available and any known gaps.
- The decision or deadline you need to discuss.
Start with a general description rather than sending a large archive of personal or financial documents. Ask what is necessary, how it should be shared and who should receive any findings. If there is an active loss or urgent risk, use your organisation’s authorised escalation procedures alongside seeking appropriate professional advice.
Discuss a focused enquiry with LY
LY’s fraud examination services cover enquiries involving business records and suspected irregularities. Joseph reviews the proposed scope and quotation before any work is agreed. A consultation is not confirmation that fraud occurred or a promise that funds will be recovered.
Chat with LY on WhatsApp — 0750 637 056
Alternative telephone: 0141 861 126
Email: info@lyprivateinvestigators.com
The truth makes a difference.
Prepared with AI assistance as general client guidance. This article is not a finding about any person or business, or case-specific legal advice.