Financial fraud detection · Tauranga, New Zealand
Financial fraud is rarely obvious. We make it visible.
Most financial fraud is not found by reading the profit and loss report. It is found by comparing records that were never meant to be compared - the ledger against the bank, the invoice against the delivery, the approval against the person who received the money. Click IT does that work for New Zealand organisations that need to know what is really happening in their financial data.
Confidential scoping first. Analysis and evidence, not accusations.
Why it goes unnoticed
A clean-looking ledger is not the same as a clean one
Fraud usually relies on volume and disconnection rather than sophistication. These are the conditions that let it survive a normal month-end.
Transactions nobody reconciles
Duplicate payments, rounded amounts, repeated suppliers and period-end adjustments are easy to miss when reconciliation is manual and months behind.
Systems that do not talk
The ledger, bank feed, payroll, invoice register and operational systems each hold part of the story. Fraud hides in the gaps between them.
Access without separation of duties
When the person who raises a supplier, approves the payment and reconciles the account is the same person, the controls are only on paper.
Evidence that arrives late
By the time a discrepancy is questioned, the supporting documents, approvals and system logs have often been archived, overwritten or lost.
What we examine
The patterns behind unexplained movement
Every engagement is scoped to the question you need answered. These are the areas we test most often.
A note on evidence. We present indicators and traceable findings, not verdicts. Whether a transaction reflects fraud, error or a legitimate arrangement is a question for your advisers, your auditors or a legal process. Our job is to make the record impossible to misread.
- Duplicate, split and overpaid invoices
- Suppliers that do not exist, or are linked to staff
- Payroll, contractor and expense-claim anomalies
- Revenue leakage, unbilled work and missed recoveries
- Unusual journals and period-end adjustments
- Bank, card and cash-handling activity
- Inventory shrink and margin irregularities
- Approval, access and segregation-of-duties patterns
- Related-party transactions and undisclosed conflicts
- Payments made outside agreed terms or thresholds
How an engagement runs
Five steps from suspicion to a defensible position
Each step has a defined output. You are never asked to commit to a larger programme before the first findings are in front of you.
- 01
Scope and legal boundaries
We agree what is being reviewed, who receives the findings and how confidentiality is handled. Where the matter may become a legal dispute, we work alongside your lawyers rather than in place of them.
- 02
Data access and preparation
Agreed extracts from the ledger, bank, payroll, invoicing and operational systems are collected, protected and normalised so records can be compared on the same terms.
- 03
Analysis and anomaly detection
Rules, reconciliation and machine learning surface the transactions and patterns that do not fit - then a person checks each indicator against the underlying documents.
- 04
Evidence and findings
Every finding is traced back to its source record, with the calculation and the supporting document attached, so your advisers and auditors can test it themselves.
- 05
Remediation and controls
Findings are turned into practical changes: approval limits, segregation of duties, reconciliation cadence, monitoring and the evidence trail that keeps them working.
The analysis layer
ForensiQ: our own AI and data intelligence product
ForensiQ fuses machine learning, deep learning and advanced algorithms with forensic-style financial investigation, data preparation and business intelligence. It reconciles complex financial and operational data, traces each finding back to its source record, and presents the result in a form a board, an auditor or an adviser can follow.
Initial assessments are delivered within 24 hours of receiving the agreed, usable data and confirming scope. Complex datasets take longer, and we confirm that in writing before work starts.
Built for evidence, not impressions
- Every figure traceable to the transaction behind it
- Reconciliation across ledger, bank, invoice and operational records
- Anomaly detection reviewed by a person, not published unchecked
- Findings packaged for boards, auditors and legal advisers
- Confidential handling under agreed terms
Straight answers
What this work can and cannot do
A credible review is clear about its limits. These are ours.
It can show what does not reconcile
Missing documents, unexplained payments, duplicate suppliers and approval patterns are all findable when the records are compared properly.
It cannot replace a legal process
We are not lawyers and we do not determine guilt. Where a matter may become a dispute or prosecution, findings are prepared for the advisers who handle that process.
It depends on the data you can provide
Incomplete extracts, missing source documents or systems that overwrite history limit what any analysis can prove. We tell you where the gaps are rather than filling them with assumptions.
Questions
Financial fraud, asked and answered
We look at activity that appears designed to misstate or misappropriate money: duplicate or inflated payments, fictitious suppliers, payroll and expense manipulation, revenue diversion, and deliberate concealment in the records. The review also surfaces error, control failure and unexplained loss, because the analysis is the same and the business still needs to know.
No, and we will not claim to. Data analysis produces indicators that require follow-up against source documents, and in some cases legal or disciplinary process. What we can do is show exactly where the records do not reconcile, who was involved in the approvals, and what evidence exists.
No. Scope is agreed first, and access is limited to the data needed for that scope - typically extracts or read-only access rather than administrative control. Confidentiality terms are agreed in writing before any data is transferred.
The initial assessment is delivered within 24 hours of receiving the agreed, usable data and confirming the scope in writing. Larger or messier datasets take longer, and we confirm that timeframe rather than promising a date before we have seen the data.
No. An audit is an independent opinion issued by an auditor. We do the analysis, evidence gathering and control work that supports an audit or an investigation. If you need assurance over controls rather than transaction-level review, see our enterprise audit readiness work.
You decide the next step. That may be a control remediation programme, an insurance or legal process, or ongoing monitoring. We can implement the control changes and set up recurring review, but the decision about how to act on the findings stays with you.
Start with the question, not the accusation
Tell us what does not look right - a supplier, a payment run, a margin, a set of accounts that never quite reconciles. We will tell you what can be tested, what it would take, and whether a lighter review would answer the question first.
Also see enterprise audit readiness and the ForensiQ product.