JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Friday, July 11, 2025

Store manager to pay $100,000 for stolen items

by

1450 days ago
20210721

The for­mer store man­ag­er of a cloth­ing store in Trinci­ty Mall has been or­dered to abide by an agree­ment be­tween her and her for­mer em­ploy­er to re­pay $100,000 for stock she stole dur­ing her tenure.

De­liv­er­ing an oral judge­ment at the end of the vir­tu­al tri­al yes­ter­day, Jus­tice Frank Seep­er­sad up­held Suite 16 Lim­it­ed’s law­suit against its for­mer em­ploy­ee Prameila Hard­een and or­dered her to clear the debt.

Ac­cord­ing to the ev­i­dence in the case, in Au­gust 2005, Hard­een was hired as a sales clerk at the com­pa­ny’s branch at Trinci­ty Mall.

In less than two years, Hard­een was pro­mot­ed to store man­ag­er.

In Sep­tem­ber 2017, the com­pa­ny’s di­rec­tor Kath­ri­na Had­dad re­ceived in­for­ma­tion that Hard­een had been steal­ing from the store by is­su­ing cash re­ceipts for in­ven­to­ry and not sub­mit­ting the in­for­ma­tion in­to the com­pa­ny’s com­put­er data­base.

Had­dad re­port­ed the lar­ce­ny to the Arou­ca Po­lice Sta­tion and two po­lice of­fi­cers vis­it­ed the store to ques­tion Hard­een.

Hard­een al­leged­ly ad­mit­ted that she had been steal­ing for sev­er­al years and agreed to sign a promis­so­ry note, un­der which she would re­pay $100,000 in a year to avoid be­ing pros­e­cut­ed.

The com­pa­ny sued Hard­een af­ter she re­peat­ed­ly failed to clear the debt.

In re­sponse to the law­suit, Hard­een counter-sued the com­pa­ny, as she claimed that she was co­erced by the po­lice of­fi­cers, who were Had­dad’s friends, in­to sign­ing the doc­u­ment. She al­so de­nied that she had sold the com­pa­ny’s in­ven­to­ry and kept the pro­ceeds.

In his judge­ment, Seep­er­sad re­ject­ed Hard­een’s claims, which he de­scribed as in­con­sis­tent and im­plau­si­ble.

He ques­tioned how Had­dad would have used cor­rupt po­lice of­fi­cers when there was ev­i­dence that she made an of­fi­cial re­port to po­lice.

He al­so not­ed that if Hard­een was as in­no­cent as claimed, she would have re­fused to sign the doc­u­ment and would have made a po­lice re­port of the in­ci­dent af­ter­wards.

Jus­tice Seep­er­sad al­so said that Hard­een was very for­tu­nate to be giv­en the op­tion to avoid fac­ing the crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem.

“Busi­ness­es should be en­cour­aged to make re­ports to the po­lice and take it to the fullest ex­tent of the law,” Seep­er­sad said.

He al­so sug­gest­ed that the com­pa­ny should seek to bring en­force­ment pro­ceed­ings if Hard­een again fails to pay.

“A mes­sage should be sent that this dis­hon­est con­duct is un­ac­cept­able,” Seep­er­sad said.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored