in the tool bar I wrote whar us lapping:
This is a good example:
Lapping
Lapping is not the fraud itself, it is a way of hiding a skimming fraud. It is done by using a second fraud to hide the first fraud. One fraud “laps” over another. If undiscovered, lapped frauds may continue indefinitely as they are constantly re-hidden and the older frauds rectified.
The fraudster steals a receipt before it is recorded. The receipt cannot be recorded as the banking will not match the entries in the debtor's ledger. Before the next statement is issued to the debtor, an entry must be made for the receipt that was stolen, or the debtor will question the balance and someone will look into the matter. The receipt must be recorded somehow, but in a way that receipts match the banking.
If a false entry cannot be made in that debtor's account, the statement may be adjusted before it is sent to the debtor, or a completely false statement can be sent. But these are not permanent fixes to the problem. An entry needs to be made in the debtor's records showing the receipt.
Lapping hides the theft from the original debtor with monies stolen from another debtor. An amount received from debtor B is banked and recorded as if it had been received from debtor A. That solves the problem with debtor A, but creates a problem with debtor B. But there is now more time to fix that problem. At that later time, monies stolen from debtor C's receipt will be used to solve the problem with debtor B, and so on.
As the first fraud is resolved by the second fraud (debtor A's account looks fine), the current fraud is usually fairly new and there is always potential to cover that with another lap. The fraudster then looks for some other opportunity when the outstanding debt can be written off entirely (e.g. adjusting a failed company account). Juggling the amounts of specific receipts and amounts stolen may prove difficult.
.