Misc-Cash Difference-Reports

Excess & Short Cash

The accounting and reporting of Cash Differences

incurred by the Bank's cashiers

Year ended December 31st	Amount of Excesses £-s-d	Number of Excesses	Amount of Shortages £-s-d	Number of Shortages
1919 - 1923	79-9-11		59-0-2
1924	26-4-8		13-18-11
1925	27-0-5		33-16-2
1926	31-3-10		22-16-11
1927	40-14-0	155	47-1-5 (1)	111
1928	49-15-3		33-18-10
1929	33-4-1		47-1-7
1930	54-16-5		30-11-8
1931	59-5-6		51-1-3
1932	68-14-5		49-2-2
1933	46-15-0		62-14-7
1934	66-8-1		77-9-9
1935	58-6-10	239	79-1-6	247
1936	82-16-9	266	58-16-10	205
1937	85-7-5	279	87-9-6	270
1938	84-14-0	286	117-18-10 (2)	326
1939	111-1-1	405	116-0-3	398
1940	204-16-2	490	192-13-8	567
1941	297-17-0	654	290-10-1	672
1942	312-2-11		308-14-0
1943 (3)
1944	227-8-10		438-5-5 (4)
1945	266-7-8		493-14-1
1946	226-19-11		279-1-9 (5)
1947	229-6-11		299-5-9
1948	227-8-6		278-5-11

NOTES:

(1) Includes a shortage of £20 at Duddeston branch (see below),

but less £1-2-0 recovered from previous year's shortages

(2) Less 1/- shortage recovered from previous year's shortages

(3) Data for the year ended 1943 not available

(4) Including £48-2-2d. in reimbursement of wrongful withdrawals

(5) Including £61 in reimbursement of wrongful withdrawals from A/c No: G 5207 (see below)

(6) In the above period, 'Unders' exceeded 'Overs' by approximately £570

The Bank's archives contain copies of reports to the Committee of Management on the subject of Cash Differences. These reports were entitled 'Excess & Short Cash'. For certain years, both the total amounts of Excesses and Shortages, plus the number of cash differences were reported. The reports for the majority of years showed only the amounts of the cash differences. The table below covers the period from September 1919 to December 1948.

The subject of Excess and Short Cash was first brought to the attention of the Bank's Management Committee in a report of the General Purposes Sub-Committee dated January 29th 1924:

Your Sub-Committee report that during the period since the opening of the Bank in September 1919 to the 31st December 1923, there has been a cash shortage of £59. 0. 2d. and an excess in cash of £79. 9. 11. The "Under and Over" account has, up to the present, met all demands upon it, but now stands at £20. 9. 9d. in credit. While it may be taken for granted that the shortage in cash is not likely to be recovered, it should be assumed that the excess cash will sooner or later be claimed. Your Sub-Committee therefore recommend that the principle should be adopted of recouping the "Under and Over Account" each year to the extent of the shortage, leaving the excess cash to credit in the account as representing a contingent liability. Your Sub-Committee further recommend that a cheque be drawn in favour of the General Manager for £59. 0. 2d. in respect of the short cash up to the 31st December, 1923, and that the General Manager be instructed to pay such money in to the credit of the "Under and Over Account".


			Excess Cash				Short Cash

	£	s	d	No	£	s	d	No
Head Office	7	9	3	23	5	6	9	20
Acocks Green	1	3	4	10	2	4	4	9
Alum Rock		1	5	5		19	8	15
Aston	1	1	8	15	4	6	3	12
Aston Cross	1	14	6	8	3	18	6	19
Balsall Heath	2	0	0	3	4	13	0	8
Bearwood	1	11	9	10		2	8	6
Billesley	1	2	0	2	1	10	10	3
Birchfield	1	12	4	5	3	17	9	8
Bordesley Green		12	10	3	2	1	9	5
Brandwood	1	15	6	6		1	3	3
Brookvale		3	0	5	2	12	9	7
Cotteridge	1	12	0	2		1	0	1
Duddeston	1	11	9	6	1	1	0	4
Erdington	21	13	0	6	25	2	0	9
Farcroft		10	6	2		10	0	1
Hall Green		19	6	13	5	6	3	13
Handsworth	3	18	11	15	4	6	5	18
Harborne	1	13	6	10		17	3	5
Hay Mills	2	2	2	4		1	0	2
Heybarnes					1	0	0	1
Hockley	1	3	0	3	2	11	3	5
Horse Fair	2	1	6	4	1	1	0	2
Kings Heath		11	3	3	3	13	6	7
Kingstanding		1	0	1		11	6	4
Ladywood		9	0	3	2	0	0	2
Little Bromwich		7	4	6			3	2
Longbridge					1	13	0	4
Lozells	2	1	11	5	3	3	0	5
Moseley	1	2	4	4		5	7	5
Nechells					2	0	0	1
Newtown Row		10	1	2		8	0	2
Northfield		13	0	2		12	1	4
Oldbury		1	9	4		11	0	3
Perry Common	1	0	3	2		3	9	5
Pype Hayes		1	2	3		7	6	3
Quinton		5	2	5			1	1
Rotton Park	1	12	0	3	1	3	0	4
Saltley		17	11	9		11	9	6
Sandwell	1	0	0	1
Selly Oak	1	0	5	3	1	14	9	3
Selly Park		12	0	2	3	10	1	6
Sherlock Street		1	6	2	1	12	0	3
Shirley					2	1	0	3
Short Heath	2	11	0	5	1	0	0	2
Small Heath	1	11	2	12		4	11	7
Solihull			7	2
Sparkbrook		10	0	1	4	13	7	12
Sparkhill	1	13	1	5		14	10	3
Springfield		7	0	6	1	13	3	6
Spring Hill		11	0	3		11	5	6
Stechford		2	0	3	1	2	10	5
Stirchley	1	0	9	3		1	3	3
Sutton Coldfield	2	2	3	5		3	3	3
Tower Hill		3	3	4		11	0	2
Ward End	2	13	9	9	1	7	3	6
Wells Green						1	3	2
Weoley Castle		2	0	2		1	0	1
Wheeler Street					1	12	9	4
Witton		1	0	1			6	1
Yardley	1	3	8	5	4	5	3	14

	84	14	0	286	117	18	10	326

Cash Shortage at Duddeston Branch: 1927

At a meeting of the Bank's Finance Sub-Committee held on July 11th 1927, it was reported that a Cash Shortage had occurred at Duddeston branch on Saturday, June 18th. In the absence of the General Manager abroad, Mr Neal (of the Bank's Auditors) was requested to "conduct an enquiry into the circumstances".

A report under the name of the General Manager was presented to the meeting of the Finance Sub-Committee on October 10th 1927:

I have gone very fully into the question of the shortage of £20 which was reported at Duddeston Branch on the 18th June last, along with the Auditors, but regret to report that nothing has transpired to explain how the shortage occurred.

The investigations, however, point to slackness in the routine of the Branch which has been brought about, to a certain extent, by the conditions under which the Branch has had to be conducted for six months, owing to structural alterations. Temporary counters had to be installed and during the alterations the counters had to be moved into three different positions.

There are, however, one or two matters which I have found it necessary to take up severely with all the officers at this Branch, as in my judgement the non-observance of instructions laid down for the guidance of Branch Officers has made it impossible to locate the shortage.

Cash for several months has been transferred to Lloyds Bank each day for safe custody in a locked bag, except on Saturdays and Mondays when it has been collected and brought to Head Office for safe custody. The cash thus placed into safe custody was not re-counted when obtained the next day, and the desirable check was not taken. I do not wish to infer that the bag had been tampered with whilst in safe custody, but it would have fixed the shortage more definitely if a re-count of cash had taken place. Again, Mr Smith, the Branch Manager, has accepted cash from the cashiers without making a full check. For instance, he has taken for granted bundles of £1 Notes supposed to represent £100. On the evening in question (June 18th) the Head Office messenger (Mr Buxton) had handed to him packets of Notes said to total £355. Before leaving the Branch he counted the same and found the total to be £335. The Branch Manager then counted same and agreed Mr Buxton's count. This produced the £20 shortage at the end of the day. It was impossible to say from which cashier the bundles had been taken, and as three cashiers handed money for transfer to Mr Smith, it cannot be said which cashier was £20 short.

The transactions that day do not give the slightest clue to a shortage of £20, and I am therefore forced to the conclusion that the shortage occurred before the 18th June.

A peculiar transaction took place on the 17th June, viz A person giving the name of Mrs Eden of 1 court, 4 house, Scholefield Street, opened an account and is credited with a £20 deposit. Application for production of the pass book proves that there is no such address and no Mrs Eden is known in Scholefield Street. Whether the £20 was actually paid or not is a matter of some doubt. The evidence is against the Bank, but the fact that a fictitious address was given and the woman has not yet been traced causes one to have some doubt as to the deposit.

Another point of importance is that at Duddeston shop-keepers frequently call for change - £5 Note for £5 silver, etc. No record is kept of these transactions and this makes it difficult to trace the movements in cash. I have thought it necessary to institute a special cash exchange slip, approved by the Auditors, to get over the difficulty in future.

I have no reason whatever to doubt the honesty of the officers at this Branch, and believe it is a genuine loss due to some mistake or carelessness. Neither is there a ground for suspicion that any depositor has extracted cash from the cash tills, or even from the counter during any counting process. But it may be that the case cited above has a bearing on the shortage, or it may be that change has been wrongly given or a deposit not accepted, or an excess withdrawal made.

A large number of pass books have been called in and examined by the Auditors, but without any result.

The shortage has very much upset the staff at the Branch, and I do not think any useful purpose can be arrived by further prolonging the investigations or giving any further reprimands. A careful look-out will be kept with a view to clearing up what is a mystery, and one which I hope will be solved eventually.

August 3rd 1927.

Account Number G 5207 - Mrs Clara Louisa Kelsey

With reference to the report submitted to the Finance and General Purposes Committee on the 7th October last, reporting the following unauthorised withdrawals from the above account:

£10 on the 12th April 1946

£10 on the 23rd April 1946

£10 on the 28th June 1946

£10 on the 6th July 1946

£11 on the 12th July 1946

£10 on the 19th July 1946

and the conviction of Mrs Mary Elizabeth Phoebe Nicholson by the Justices at the Victoria Law Courts on the 16th August last, I have to report that an application has now been received from the depositor asking for the total amount in question, viz £61, to be re-credited.

Mrs Nicholson was fined £3 on each offence. She was allowed 28 days in which to pay this fine, and was also ordered to make restitution of the £61 obtained by her. I understand from Mr Taylor of the Magistrates' Clerk's Office that up to the 20th February they had received from Mrs Nicholson the sum of £53 on account of a total of £85 for restitution of the amount withdrawn and fine, leaving a balance still to be paid of £32. It appears that the Defendant paid £2 per week for some time, and then was given permission to pay £1 per week.

Mr Taylor suggests that it would be better for their purposes if the total amount is first received by them, before any part of it is handed over to the Bank.

In the circumstances I shall be glad of the authority of the Committee to re-credit to Mrs Kelsey's account the sum in question of £61 from the "Unders and Overs" Account, which would be, in turn, credited with the amount when received, in due course, from the Magistrates' Clerk's Office.

J P Hilton,

15th March 1947

As described in Branch Accounting, amounts of individual cash errors were reported to Head Office by letter, and the amount of the error was debited or credited to Head Office Account No X305. It was the Bank's practice to annually write off the amount of shortages to General Expenditure. The amount of excesses was retained in Account X305 as a liability of the Bank to customers that could, theoretically, be claimed. However, in later years, when the liability had grown to a substantial sum, shortages were charged against that liability.

Occasionally, the amount written off to General Expenditure was increased to cover amounts lost through forgeries. In 1947, two forgeries cost the Bank £230, and in 1948 a further two instances amounted to £45-10s-0d. In 1927, a £20 shortage occurred at Duddeston branch - a very substantial sum at that time, resulting in a report to the Management Committee (see below).

The Year Ended December 31st 1941 incurred a total of 1,326 cash differences reported - a larger number than previous years due to the high number of inexperienced staff being employed during the Second World War. However, in that period the number of transactions handled were about 3,000,000 - meaning that the error rate was only about 0.04%.

Included in the report to the Committee of Management for 1938, was an analysis by branch: