Fraud and embezzlement matters require the economist to establish how much was taken, over what period, by what mechanism, and where it went, and then to quantify the loss to the business or the victim in a form that supports a civil claim or a restitution figure. The analysis is built from the transaction record and states what was found, what could not be determined, and the basis for every amount.
In short
The claim consists of the amounts diverted, reconstructed transaction by transaction from bank records, the general ledger, payroll, vendor files, and supporting documents; the consequential losses the diversion caused, such as lost profits when funds were unavailable to the business, penalties and interest, or the cost of borrowing to replace the funds; the cost of investigating and remediating the scheme; and, where the assets were converted into property or other holdings, the current value of what the funds bought. The drivers are the completeness of the bank and accounting records, the accounting system's audit trail, and third-party records that confirm or contradict the internal books.
The direct loss is usually the amount traced through the records, and its size depends on how long the scheme ran and how far back the records permit reconstruction. Consequential losses can exceed the direct loss when the diversion starved a business of working capital or caused a default. Where the funds were used to acquire assets, tracing to those assets can support recovery from the assets themselves, which changes the practical exposure. The analysis states the amounts by year and by method so that partial findings and limitations are visible.
The economist maps the scheme's mechanism from the records, identifies each transaction that fits it, and confirms the amounts against bank statements, cancelled checks, and third-party documents rather than the internal books alone. The diverted funds are traced forward to the accounts and assets they reached, and the consequential losses are quantified from the business's financial records with the causal link explained. The report separates the amounts established from records, the amounts estimated from patterns where records are missing, and the amounts that could not be determined, so the claim rests on a documented figure and the fact finder can see the limits of the evidence.
Stage-by-stage guidance on working with a forensic economist in fraud and embezzlement litigation.
Bank statements with check images and deposit detail for every account involved, the general ledger and sub-ledgers, payroll records, vendor master files and invoices, expense reports, and access logs for the accounting system. Third-party records, such as vendor confirmations and bank records obtained by subpoena, are often decisive.
The economist quantifies what the records support directly and, where a consistent pattern exists, estimates the missing periods with the method and its limitations stated. The report separates documented amounts from estimated amounts so counsel can decide how to present each.
Yes. Tracing follows the diverted funds through the accounts they passed through to real estate, vehicles, investments, or other holdings, and documents each step. The report identifies the assets and the portion of their value attributable to the diverted funds.
No. The economist establishes what happened to the money, how, and in what amounts. Whether the conduct was fraudulent is a question for the fact finder on the whole record.
Request a consultation on fraud and embezzlement cases or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.