The Detective’s DeskHARD · CASE FILE
Hard · A project expense review
Two payments have different descriptions and payee names. The coordinator calls them separate purchases. Trace the supplier transaction and actual beneficiaries, then decide whether the paying assistant understood the duplication.
Read the case file below, or open the interactive desk to examine records, keep notes and submit your reasoning. These are the case materials, without the solution.
The supplier’s authenticated records show one delivered item. Both reimbursement transfers are preserved. You do not need to calculate a total; the question is whether the same transaction was represented twice.
Approvals officer
I approved Ruth’s original reimbursement only. My approval code was reused on the second claim.
The archive keeps the complete request associated with each approval code.
Supplier representative
We supplied one item and received one payment. There was no second sale.
Our item serial and bank receipt link to K24.
Project purchaser
There was one equipment purchase. I submitted the supplier’s original invoice for reimbursement.
The supplier marks its invoice with transaction K24.
Project coordinator
The two payment entries concern different purchases. I checked both claims.
One is described as an invoice, the other as a cash advance clearance.
Accounts assistant
I paid the second claim after Oren said it had independent approval.
The second transfer goes to an account with a different payee name, but the supplier transaction printed on its attachment is still K24.
Read each record on its own terms. A claim made by a person is different from a fact established by an independent record.
Physical record · Purchasing file
One item with serial S31 is sold under K24. The supplier receives one payment, with no second item or second sale.
Physical record · Purchasing file
Ruth submits K24 for the actual purchase. Leo’s approval A9 refers to this request and its one attached item serial. The first reimbursement pays Ruth.
Physical record · Approval archive
A9 approves only Ruth’s original K24 reimbursement. No authority exists to use it for Oren’s differently described second payment.
Physical record · Approval archive
Before submitting, Oren writes in his own claim draft, “Reuse K24 under advance clearance; crop the first payee and approval request.” The authenticated revision history predates payment.
Physical record · Accounts desk
Oren submits a “cash advance clearance” under another payee name. Its cropped attachment still contains transaction K24 and item serial S31. Changing a description did not create a second purchase.
Physical record · Purchasing file
Mina supplies the full register confirming only S31 under K24. It independently corroborates the single-sale receipt rather than relying on the coordinator’s description.
Physical record · Accounts desk
Oren assures Nell that the second claim has independent approval. She asks for its link; he supplies the cropped A9 attachment. Her message does not agree to paying K24 twice or to a private diversion.
Physical record · Accounts desk
The second transfer goes to an account controlled by Oren’s private services business. It is not the supplier’s account and does not clear a recorded project advance.
Use the interactive case desk to select your finding and cite the records that support it. The answer is checked there, and your progress stays in your browser.
Compare the records with each account. Work out what the evidence establishes, then separate that finding from anything it does not prove.