GB2411035A

GB2411035A - Monotoring cash handling in a retail environment

Info

Publication number: GB2411035A
Application number: GB0403147A
Authority: GB
Inventors: Christopher Lare; Matthew Fortunka
Original assignee: Tellermate Group Ltd
Current assignee: Tellermate Group Ltd
Priority date: 2004-02-12
Filing date: 2004-02-12
Publication date: 2005-08-17
Also published as: WO2005081192A1; GB0403147D0; GB0616886D0; GB2426111A

Abstract

In a cash-handling environment in which a cash register includes or is associated with means to monitor and count the cash within it, successive counts are compared and the difference compared with a predetermined, expected, value to ensure that it is sufficiently consistent with this. The system can monitor the removal of cash skimmed from the cash register and also check the giving of correct change. The cash register can be used together with a safe which also has cash counting means so that an amount of cash skimmed from the cash register can be compared with that added to the safe.

Description

241 1 035 Improvements in cash handling This invention relates to

improvements in processing cash used in the course of transactions, especially in a retail environment. The invention particularly relates to improvements in cash register operator efficiency.

Cash registers, also known as cash tills, are regularly employed in retail environments to accept and handle a variety of cash items. For avoidance of doubt, the term 'cash' or 'cash items' will hereafter refer to all forms of payment tendered and accepted in the course of retail transactions, typically comprising but not limited to: banknotes, coins, promissory notes, vouchers and tokens. The cash items are stored in the part of the cash register known as the cash drawer, or sometimes simply referred to as the drawer' in this context.

Generally, cash drawers are set up at the start of the working shift with a known amount and composition of cash in the cash drawer of the cash register, and the amount of cash increases throughout the shift as customers conduct transactions and cash is tendered. The amount of cash in a cash drawer at the start of the shift is often referred to as a 'float' and this value is known, and the composition of the float is also usually known. It is also generally true that the composition of the cash mix within the cash drawer changes throughout the day so that the number of high denomination cash items increases and the number of low denomination cash items decreases as change is tendered to customers in the course of transactions.

As the cash drawer becomes full it may be necessary to remove some or all of the cash within the cash drawer, or even remove the entire cash drawer and replace it with a freshly prepared cash drawer, as a full cash drawer presents a significant theft risk. The action of removing some or all of the cash in a cash drawer during a working shift is often known as 'skimming'. For convenience in the remainder of this specification, the cash within a cash register drawer at any time shall be referred to simply as the 'drawer cash'.

Further considerations include having to replenish individual cash denominations during a shift, for example low denomination coins or banknotes are the most commonly-used cash items and these may be used up before the end of the shift.

When replenishment is needed, a cash register operator, or'cashier', will indicate that additional cash is needed and appropriate cash is brought over to that cashier.

However, this practice leads to delay and inefficiency in processing cash register transactions as it is common for a request for additional cash to be issued during a transaction, the upshot of which is that that transaction cannot be completed until the requested cash is delivered. The additional cash may be added to the cash register in pre-packaged rolls or bags of a stated value, and a record may be kept of how much additional cash has been added to that cash drawer in order for accurate accounting at the end of the shift. An alternative method of accounting for such 'issues' of additional cash is for the cashier to exchange higher denomination cash for the required change. There are also advanced methods for requesting and performing change replenishment, such as the transmission of a change replenishment signal sent to a supervisor, either at the instigation of the cashier or automatically generated upon detection of a low change signal.

When one cashier swaps with another cashier high denomination cash items for low denomination cash items, or vice-versa, a manual count of the cash exchanged is usually undertaken. An additional step may be for the cashiers to record this cash transaction. As mentioned previously, this type of cash exchange often occurs in the middle of a customer transaction as typically it is only when the transaction is rung through that a cashier realises a paucity of cash in any cash denomination.

However, it is known that frequently the actual amount of cash in a roll or bag is not exactly the value stated on the roll or bag, and this poses additional problems during the accounting processes. Because of this problem it is not unusual for a painstaking and time-consuming manual count to be carried out to determine the exact value of cash present in a roll or bag before the additional cash is added to a cash drawer.

From a management perspective, keeping track of each transaction during the shift is desirable and this is commonly achieved through a print-out of the transaction details, typically recorded by a Point Of Sale (POS) terminal on paper and/or stored on electronic storage means for later analysis. The data generated by POS terminals will be hereafter referred to as 'POS data'. Accordingly it may also be desirable to record the value and composition of the float within the cash register after each transaction so that an accurate picture of the cash situation throughout the shift may be generated. The cash value within the cash drawer calculated from POS data is referred to as the 'POS cash value'.

However, the composition and value of cash held within a cash register is not immediately obvious and determining the composition and value accurately has historically required a time-consuming manual count operation. It may thus be further desirable that accurate cash value data is obtained frequently throughout the working day or shift, perhaps after each individual transaction, and that this is done with as little intrusion as possible to the operation of the cash register and that as little operator intervention is required as possible.

From the above it is clear that managing the drawer cash is ideally a continuous process which is currently undertaken by visual checking or manual counting, and then only undertaken at intervals. A further drawback is that even when a visual check or manual count is undertaken, an erroneous situation may not be detected due to operator error and any subsequent course of corrective action is dependent upon operator training and skill. It would therefore be desirable for a cash drawer to continuously monitor the drawer cash and report accordingly.

An example of an intelligent' cash register is disclosed in European patent application EP 0724242 to Tellermate Plc., which describes a cash register comprising weighing means arranged to take weight readings from the cash compartments of the cash register. The weight readings of each compartment may then be converted to a cash value by a processing unit so that the total cash value contained in the register and the composition of this cash may be obtained without manual intervention.

With the ability to generate the value and composition of cash present in the cash drawer of an intelligent cash register in real time - all data types relating to these attributes referred to hereafter as 'CASH data' many other cash management tools become available other than just reporting or recording the cash situation at a given moment.

It is known that an intelligent cash register may possess the ability to initiate a request for additional cash or to request a skim as the intelligent cash register detects when cash levels are too low or too high. Usually, these requests require that a predetermined threshold has been reached.

It is still a problem that any difference between the value of cash shown by the CASH data and the expected value of cash to be present derived from POS data (i.e. the POS cash value) has to be accounted for. In the example situations given above where cash items are added or removed to a cash drawer without any associated POS transaction, or in the midst of a legitimate POS transaction, it will require manual intervention at a later time to review and reconcile any such differences between the CASH data and the POS data. In many POS systems provision is made for the cashier to record a mark against any transaction which involves a seemingly unexplained change in CASH data. However, these provisions still require cashier intervention and cashiers may not always remember to follow the correct procedure.

At present known POS systems are only capable of catering for a narrow range of circumstances wherein CASH data appears to be un-related to any POS transaction.

Inability to recognise and cater for circumstances falling outside this narrow range results in generation of false alarms which require manual investigation, increasing the burden on the cashier or supervisor and lowering efficiency.

It is with a view to solving the above problems that we provide in a cashhandling environment, a method of rationalizing a difference between successive cash counts, the cash counts using CASH data items, the method comprising storing CASH data items generated by successive cash counts; obtaining from the stored CASH data items a cash value for successive CASH data items; determining a difference between successive cash values; comparing the cash value difference to a predetermined cash amount; and identifying the cash value difference as being legitimate when the cash value difference corresponds to the predetermined cash amount.

Put another way, the invention also provides in a cash-handling environment, a method of rationalizing a difference between successive cash counts, the cash counts using CASH data items, the method comprising storing CASH data items generated by successive cash counts; obtaining from the stored CASH data items a cash value for successive CASH data items; obtaining from the stored CASH data items the cash composition of successive CASH data items; determining the difference between successive cash values; determining the difference between successive cash compositions; and identifying a difference in successive cash compositions as legitimate providing the difference between successive cash values is within a predetermined threshold.

In a further embodiment of the invention there is also provided a method of ratifying a first sum of cash taken from an intelligent cash register with a second sum of cash deposited in an intelligent safe, the method comprising providing communication means between the intelligent cash register and the intelligent safe; sensing the removal of the first sum of cash from the intelligent cash register; storing the CASH data relating to the removal of the first sum of cash; sensing the depositing of the second sum of cash in the intelligent safe; storing the CASH data relating to the depositing of the second sum of cash; comparing the first sum of cash taken from the intelligent cash register with the second sum of cash deposited in the intelligent safe; providing a successful ratification signal upon determining the two sums of cash are within predetermined limits of each other.

In another aspect of the invention, there is also provided apparatus for rationalising a difference between successive cash counts, the cash counts using CASH data items, the apparatus comprising means for storing CASH data items generated by successive cash counts; means for obtaining from the stored CASH data items a cash value for successive CASH data items; means for determining a difference between successive cash values; means for comparing the cash value difference to a predetermined cash amount; and means for identifying the cash value difference as being legitimate when the cash value difference corresponds to the predetermined cash amount.

The invention can also be put as apparatus for rationalizing a difference between successive cash counts, the cash counts using CASH data items, the apparatus comprising means for storing CASH data items generated by successive cash counts; means for obtaining from the stored CASH data items a cash value for successive CASH data items; means for obtaining from the stored CASH data items the cash composition of successive CASH data items; means for determining the difference lo between successive cash values; means for determining the difference between successive cash compositions; means for identifying a difference in successive cash compositions as legitimate providing the difference between successive cash values is within a predetermined threshold.

Additionally, the invention also provides for apparatus for ratifying a first sum of cash taken from an intelligent cash register with a second sum of cash deposited in an intelligent safe, the apparatus comprising means for providing communication means between the intelligent cash register and the intelligent safe; means for sensing the removal of the first sum of cash from the intelligent cash register; means for storing the CASH data relating to the removal of the first sum of cash; means for sensing the depositing of the second sum of cash in the intelligent safe; means for storing the CASH data relating to the depositing of the second sum of cash; means for comparing the first sum of cash taken from the intelligent cash register with the second sum of cash deposited in the intelligent safe; means for providing a successful ratification signal upon determining the two sums of cash are within predetermined limits of each other.

Further optional features to the invention are described in the remainder of this

specification and the appended claims.

In practice, cash-handling environments will require secure storage means for cash generated during trade, the invention also encompasses a method of ratifying a first sum of cash taken from an intelligent cash register with a second sum of cash deposited in an intelligent safe, the method comprising providing communication means between the intelligent cash register and the intelligent safe; sensing the removal of the first sum of cash from the intelligent cash register; storing the CASH data relating to the removal of the first sum of cash. sensing the depositing of the second sum of cash in the intelligent safe; storing the CASH data relating to the depositing of the second sum of cash; comparing the first sum of cash taken from the intelligent cash register with the second sum of cash deposited in the intelligent safe; and providing a successful ratification signal upon determining the two sums of cash are within predetermined limits of each other.

In order that the invention may be more readily understood, some embodiments in accordance therewith will now be described, by way of example, with reference to the accompanying drawings in which: Figure 1 exemplifies a typical hardware system for implementing the method of the invention; Figure 2 shows a functional block diagram of a first aspect of the invention relating to cash skims; Figure 3 shows a functional block diagram of a second embodiment of the first aspect of the invention also relating to cash skims; Figure 4 shows a functional block diagram of a second aspect of the invention relating to the detection of issuance of change; Figure 5 shows a functional block diagram of a second embodiment of the second aspect of the invention; and Figure 6 shows a functional block diagram of a third embodiment of the second aspect of the invention.

In Figure 1, there is provided weighing means 2 which may comprise the cash drawer of an intelligent cash register or some type of weighing scale with an electronic output indicative of the weight measured. Weighing means 2 is connected in turn to a POS terminal 3 which produces POS data corresponding to each transaction, and weighing means 2 so that data relating to the weight of a sample placed upon the weighing means 2 may be transmitted electronically to the processing unit 4. POS terminal 3 is also connected to the processing unit 4. Also connected to the processing unit 4 is a data store 6 and the processing unit 4 may read and write data to/from the data store 6. A video display unit 8, or some other means of alerting an operator or linked master control unit (not shown) to an erroneous situation, is optionally connected to the processing unit 4. For example, the processing unit 4 may, instead of being a stand- alone unit, be connected as part of a larger network (not shown in Figure 1) and receive and transmit data to a network controller (also not shown). Also connected to the larger network may be an intelligent safe 9 which is connected to the larger network by well-known POS system networking means. The intelligent safe 9 is connected in some way such that cash deposited in the intelligent safe 9 can be combined with the drawer cash to enable a complete reconciliation to be undertaken of all cash relating to each respective cash register/POS terminal. The configuration of the network-attached intelligent safe is only one illustration of how a network may be configured - other likely configurations include having one intelligent safe per POS terminal, one intelligent safe shared between a number of POS terminals (such as in Figure 1) or one intelligent safe per store. Additionally, the connection means shown in Figure 1 is only illustrative - it is envisaged that the intelligent safe 9 may instead be connected to the cash drawer which acts as the gateway for sending and forwarding data concerning cash in the intelligent safe 9 between the processing unit 4 and/or the data store 6.

It is noted that in the above description to Figure 1, hardware systems able to count cash using means other than weighing methods may equally well be used - these other methods include banknote 'flipping' methods or systems which incorporate coin/banknote validation means and the like.

In use, to determine the value or number of a plurality of cash items placed on the weighing means 2, the weight reading output from the weighing means 2 is fed into the processing unit 4 which determines the cash value by processing the weight reading output of each denomination with a stored value of the reference weight of each respective denomination retrieved from the data store 6 or kept in local memory.

This weighing and processing action is referred to as a 'cash count' and the result generated by a cash count is part of the data items referred to generally as CASH data. Optionally, all the data output from processing unit 4, for example the unprocessed weight readings or calculated cash values, may be kept on the data store 6 for retrieval at the end of the shift, the trading day or a longer period which is user specified. The data output from processing unit 4 is stored on the data store 6 together with timestamps relating to the date and time of recordal of each data item.

In the case of a cash drawer from an intelligent cash register, each compartment of the cash drawer may have a corresponding weighing means 2 and obviously the total value of cash in the cash drawer may be derived from a summation of the cash value of each compartment of the cash drawer.

Turning to Figure 2, this shows a method of the invention implemented by the apparatus shown in Figure 1. The background to the method shown in Figure 2 is that a cash skim has taken place in the midst of a normal transaction - this being a more complex scenario compared to a straightforward cash skim that is distinct from a normal transaction - but the method remains the same. Consequently, the actual change in cash detected under these circumstances is likely to be a combination of cash skim and cash tendered by the customer in the normal course of the transaction.

Furthermore, while the process described below refers to only one denomination, it is obvious that the same procedure may be applied to all other denominations present, either at the same time or in series.

Starting at 10, a transaction has just been completed and the cash drawer of the intelligent cash register referred to in Figure 1 has been closed. Typically at this point a cash count according to the process described in Figure 1 is conducted and consequently the number of cash items in the cash drawer, as a whole and individually by denomination, is determined. At 12 a check is carried out to determine whether the total value of cash in the cash drawer according to CASH data deviates from the expected cash value calculated according to POS data by a predetermined value. If the check is negative, the method continues to 14 where a further check is carried out to determine whether the number of items, or total value, of any individual denomination according to the CASH data deviates from the expected number of items, or total value, by a predetermined threshold. If the check at 14 is also negative, the remaining steps of CASH and/or POS data processing, e.g. reconciling CASH and POS data, are carried out at 16 and the method finishes at 18, looping back to 10 again when a further transaction takes place.

If check state 12 or check state 14 results in a positive determination, i.e. that the discrepancies between the relevant CASH data and the relevant calculated value from POS data exceed a predetermined or userset level, the system as shown in Figure 1 will recognise that a cash skim has taken place. For example, if the CASH data indicates that 200 has been removed when the transaction, according to POS data, would not call for such a large cash movement, the system may reasonably deduce that this cash movement was not part of the transaction but instead part of a cash skim. Accordingly, at 20 the difference between the CASH data value and the calculated cash value derived from POS data is determined, and at 22 the expected value of the transaction is subtracted from the value determined at 20 in order to account for the fact that a transaction may have taken place at the same time as the detected cash skim.

The resultant value output from step 22 is then rounded down to the nearest whole number of that denomination at 24, and this number of items is then checked at 26 to confirm that the number of items determined to have been removed in the detected skim did in fact correspond to the preset number of items that are skimmed during a skim action. It is noted here that the management or supervisor may have already determined preset amounts to skim during a skimming action, and that these pre-set amounts and their corresponding pre-set composition of items, are checked at during this step.

It is worth reminding here that once a threshold value has been exceeded, as detected in steps 12 or 14, it is deduced that the management has removed an amount of cash in a skim which may or may not be a predetermined amount, and may or may not comprise a predetermined composition.

If the determination of check 26 is positive, the skimmed cash amount is then subtracted at 28 from the value of the cash difference already determined at 20 and this cash remainder is then fed, at 30, back into the procedure at 16 to conduct further transaction checks. The further transaction checks may comprise using variances between CASH and predicted POS data values for lower denominations as the nature of cash skims implies that only high denominations are skimmed. Inaccuracies or other fraud may still be detected by checking variances in the lower denominations not usually skimmed. The evaluation process is enhanced in this way by taking account of the fact that lower denomination cash items do not usually affect the skim detection and calculation steps.

If at check 26 the determination is negative, this implies that the assumed skim was not actually a skim and an alarm/warning signal is generated at 32 to attract the attention of a supervisor for manual checking. It is usual that at any step during the procedure outlined in Figure 2, should an alarm/warning status be entered that preferably all data corresponding to that erroneous finding be logged to a data store (for example data store 6 of Figure 1) for detailed analysis later.

In practice, the check states 12 and 14 may be combined into a single checking step rather than two discrete checks, and the threshold levels used are typically varied according to the cash usage characteristics of each retail store.

As a further refinement, it might be that the need to skim is determined by the rate at which cash increases, determined from CASH data and/or POS data. The system shown in Figure 1 may then trigger its own skim request sent to supervisors, once it determines that a threshold cash level has been reached. As the system described in Figure 1 can easily form part of a network, it is envisaged that the method of the present invention may be used to trigger skims for other cash registers in the network too.

Once a cash skim has taken place, it is possible that the skimmed cash is taken straight to a cash office for processing. Alternatively, the skimmed cash may be placed in a safe until ready for processing after the shift. Instead of an ordinary safe, an intelligent safe, such as the intelligent safe 9 as shown in Figure 1, may be used.

An intelligent safe, like an intelligent cash register, has the ability to determine the value and composition of cash items placed in the safe. Intelligent safes are well known in the art and usually comprise some means for validating cash items as they are entered into a safe.

Intelligent safes 9, such as the one described above, are often fitted with means for entry recordal such that a supervisor may identify the cash register, POS terminal or cashier ID from which the cash skim was collected. However, it would be desirable for the intelligent safe 9 to be able to identify automatically from which intelligent cash register or POS terminal the cash placed within the safe was taken as the intelligent safe 9 is linked to the intelligent cash registers and POS terminals by means of the a network as shown in Figure 1. When a cash skim is taken, an intelligent cash register will be able to detect that a skim has taken place and also determine the value of the skim, and this can be matched with the value of the cash placed within the intelligent safe 9 to determine a match. It is assumed that cash skimmed from intelligent cash registers will be placed in the safe within a short time.

Preferably, any system incorporating an intelligent safe 9 would be able to create a warning, report or otherwise indicate that since a skim has taken place (detected by an intelligent cash register) a corresponding sum of money has not yet been placed within the safe - this provides an additional safety/anti-fraud benefit.

An improvement to processing cash skims deposited in an intelligent safe is shown in Figure 3 wherein the process starts at 40 when an intelligent cash register detects that a cash skim has been removed. An incremental timer (not shown in Figure 1 but accessible to either, or both, the intelligent cash register and the intelligent safe 9) is started at 42 and a check is carried out at 44 to see if a sum of cash has been deposited into the intelligent safe 9. Should this check be positive, the procedure carries on to a further check at 46 to ascertain whether the cash deposited into the intelligent safe 9 matches the value of a cash skim detected as having been removed from one of the intelligent cash registers in the network - although a network of cash registers is not shown in Figure 1 this is easily achieved through common POS networking techniques. Should this determination be positive, the cash skim now present in the intelligent safe 9 is recorded (preferably by the networked data store 6 or the intelligent safe 9 itself) as having been removed from the intelligent cash register identified by the matching step at 46. The process is then complete at 50 and loops back to 40 when a further cash skim removal has been detected.

If, however, the check at 44 returns a false result, i.e. that no cash has been entered into the intelligent safe 9, the timer at 52 increments and a check is carried out at 54 to determine whether the timer has reached a predetermined value indicating expiry of a time-out period. Should this further check be negative, the procedure loops back to 44 to check whether cash has been placed in the intelligent safe 9 and keeps looping until either cash is entered into the safe at 44 or the timer reaches the I predetermined time-out value at 54 whereupon both the intelligent safe 9 and the cash drawer of the intelligent cash register involved at 40 arelocked at 56 until a supervisor investigates the situation and authorises unlocking. Upon locking, a warning signal is initiated at 58 by appropriate means to alert the supervisor's attention.

Should the check at 46 provide a negative answer, i.e. that the cash placed in the intelligent safe 9 does not match a skim detected by any intelligent cash register in the network, the procedure loops back to 52 and increments the timer. The procedure continues to decision state 54 and then onwards as aforesaid.

It is envisaged that the match conducted at 46 be allowed to accept a partial match, or one which falls within acceptable predetermined error margins, although this is not an essential feature. The lock applied to the intelligent safe 9 and cash register drawer at step 56 may simply be an electronic lock controlled by software that prevents the drawer from opening under the control of the POS terminal, or the lock may be a more secure form of electro-mechanical mechanism.

It is preferred that once a cash skim has been detected, as in the case of Figure 2, or when a cash skim has been safely lodged in a safe, as in the case of Figure 3, that appropriate messages are displayed through display means 8, logged on data store 6 or a printed record is produced by a printer (not shown in Figure 1) attached either to the intelligent safe 9, the intelligent cash register or attached as a network printer available to all components shown in Figure 1. The connecting means between the various components in Figure 1 are envisaged as using suitable common standards such as RS-232 or a proprietary connecting technology such as the Applicant's TillBus or by any suitable connectivity standards.

Figures 4, 5 and 6 relate to another problem identified earlier - that of identifying and processing change issues. As explained before, the act of providing change, typically exchanging a high denomination cash item for lower denomination cash items, leads to the generation of CASH data without an obvious POS data entry with which to reconcile it.

The process shown in Figure 4 is initiated at 60 by the completion of a transaction and a cash count is undertaken to determine the value and composition of cash in the intelligent cash register drawer. The cash value determined from the CASH data generated by the cash count is compared to the expected cash value calculated from the POS data, and at 62 if no discrepancy is detected - or a discrepancy is within acceptable predetermined margins - the cash comparison is considered as being successfully completed. The process then skips to 72 where it loops back to the start at 60 upon completion of the next transaction.

If, however, a discrepancy is detected at 62 - or a discrepancy between CASH data and POS data falls outside acceptable predetermined margins further checks are carried out to see if any predetermined, or 'standard' quantities of low denomination cash items have been added - the term standard, quantity is discussed immediately below.

It should be noted here that the process described above in Figure 4, as well as in the following Figures 5 and 6, requires that a supervisor define pre-determined quantities of cash items, or combinations of cash items, that may be used in legitimate change issue actions. For avoidance of doubt therefore, standard quantities refers to the number of cash items that will be involved in a legitimate change issue action.

As mentioned above, it is often the case that pre-packaged rolls or bags of cash items may in fact contain a different number of cash items to that stated on the packaging.

By defining an allowed change issue to be that corresponding to the number of coins nominally present in a pre-packaged roll or bag, any discrepancy between the nominal number of items and the actual measured number of items may be detected and flagged for review by a supervisor, and the data logged for further analysis. This feature has a further benefit as it may detect fraudulent activity, for example a cashier who systematically removes a number of cash items from each new pre-packaged roll or bag of cash items before the cash items are deposited in the cash register drawer.

It is further desirable for a supervisor also to define the types of cash denominations 5 that are likely to be used in change issue actions. For example, it is highly unlikely that several high denomination banknotes will ever need to be removed at once from a cash register drawer and exchanged for smaller denominations. If this type of change in CASH data was detected an error signal would be raised, possibly locking that POS terminal and/or cash drawer, or isolating the terminal from the network, until a supervisor can be summoned to check the situation. Similarly, definitions of types of cash denominations likely to be involved in a skim can also be defined, with a suitable alarm raised if denominations other than those defined are detected as being involved in a skim action.

With all the aforementioned definitions, it is preferable that error margins are provided so that only variances detected as falling outside these error margins are acted upon in order to minimise false alarm situations. Error margins may also help to screen out false alarms when a pre-packaged roll or bag of cash items is actually one or more items over or under the stated value - a suitable value for these error margins may usefully be determined from experience or from the bag/roll provider's specifications for pre-packaged rolls or bags of cash items.

Returning to the process described in Figure 4, should a discrepancy be detected at 62 that subsequently is found at 64 not to fit with any of the standard quantities, a further check at 66 is carried out to determine whether the variance between CASH data and POS data could be accepted once the aforementioned error margins are considered. This step detects the case of pre-packaged rolls or bags of cash items being added which are overpacked or underpacked by choosing whether to subtract the standard quantity and carry on analysis on the remainder, or to subtract the actual detected discrepancy and carry on analysis with that remainder. An alarm could be raised if a false reading was detected at decision step 64. It is noted here that it may alternatively be desirable for an alarm to be raised at every detected discrepancy, in which case error margins may or may not be employed.

If the check at 66 determines that the variance lies outside acceptable error margins, a further check is carried out at 68 to see if any other denominations defined as being suitable for use in change issue actions require counting. If the answer at 68 is negative, the next step at 70 is to conduct a further reconciliation between CASH data and POS data to see if the transaction now balances after any change issue actions have been identified and taken into account into the balancing procedures.

If the answer at 68 is positive, the procedure loops back to 64 to carry out the procedure of steps 64, 66 and 68 on the remaining denominations until all denominations are processed.

At 66, should the variance be found to lie within acceptable error margins and a close enough match be identified, the relevant change issue action is identified as having taken place and this amount is incorporated into the CASH data by subtracting the exact match value from the variance between CASH data and POS data at 74. The exact value of change added is reported at 76 by data logging or visual display means, and the discrepancy between the detected value and the assumed exact match value is reported at 77. The procedure loops back to 68 for further processing.

Should the check at 64 be found to identify a standard quantity, the procedure goes to step 74 immediately, skipping step 66, whereupon it loops back to step 68 upon logging and reporting of the change issue action. s

Should the answer to 70 be that the CASH data and POS data from the transaction now balances, the procedure ends at 72 and loops back to 60 upon a new transaction and the procedure starts once again. If the answer to 70 is that the transaction still doesn't balance, all relevant data is recorded at 78 and an error signal may be displayed to attract the attention of a supervisor. Moreover the POS terminal may be locked until the discrepancy is resolved or explained.

Figure 5 shows a further refinement of the process described in Figure 4 wherein during a transaction, a cashier finds that a cash drawer does not contain enough of one denomination to issue the customer with correct change, so immediately carries out a change issue action before using some of this newly-acquired change in making up the customer's change. This implies that the CASH data will not reflect the correct change expected for a standard change issue action, and may even be above the threshold for acceptance as a change issue action. In this case additional processing as shown in Figure 5 would be desirable.

It is noted that in advance of processing a transaction according to Figure 5, a 'best guess' of the make-up of change that the cashier would issue is first conducted. This may be from a look-up table of known combinations of change likely to be given to the customer in response to the money tendered by the customer and the price appropriate to the transaction.

The procedure then checks to see if the 'best guess' change combination can explain any detected addition of cash items. If there is a match it is assumed that change has been removed from the change issue and given to the customer. The value of the change assumed to have been given to the customer is then automatically added back to the denominations involved for the purpose of evaluating and processing the change issue action.

Starting at 80, according to the cash tendered by the customer the 'best guess' change combination is identified from a prepared list of change combinations at 82. At 84 a check is carried out to see if the variance detected between CASH data and POS data can be explained by the 'best guess' or another combination of change from the prepared list. If the check at 84 is negative, normal processing is then continued as a change issue action is considered not to have happened. Should the check at 84 be positive, the value of the change identified as being tendered is then added back to the variance at 86, and further processing of the transaction is carried out using the new adjusted variance.

A further refinement to the above is the ability of the procedure to evaluate the need for change when cash is removed from the drawer over and above that expected by the transaction in progress. It is reasonable to assume that any removal of cash in this manner will be used to buy change. If an equivalent amount of change is not added to the drawer within a defined period (possibly measured in time or elapsed intervening number of transactions) an audio/visual warning or some other form of notification will be initiated and pertinent data recorded.

It is also desirable to warn of, and/or record, situations when change has been added for no apparent reason: perhaps sufficient change was detected as already being available when further change was added - a sequence of events that may be required by some types of cashier fraud. The range of acceptable change issues could be pre-determined or determined from analysis.

Figure 6 shows a further refinement wherein issuing of change is determined by the rate of change usage. In the example shown in Figure 6, a threshold of required change is set and the system evaluates when that threshold will be reached at the historical rate of change usage.

This evaluation will be undertaken automatically at regular or predetermined intervals, or it may be determined manually. A positive result following this type of evaluation will initiate an issue of change request to the operator.

Starting at 100, the rate of change usage for a particular denomination is monitored and extrapolated to determine when this denomination will be exhausted, or the number of items falls below a minimum threshold, in the cash drawer. A check is carried out at 102 to determine whether replenishment will be required before the next check is scheduled to be carried out, and if replenishment is required, an issue of change request is initiated at 104 and the procedure is then repeated at 106 for the other denominations in the cash drawer. If the check at 102 is negative, the procedure skips to 106 and thereafter loops back to 100 to restart.

In the existing change issuing operations, supervisors typically spend a large part of their day walking to and fro between a safe or other cash repository and a group of cash registers, responding in each case to urgent requests for change from each register as its supply of change nears exhaustion. In contrast, it is envisaged that the system as shown in Figure 6 may consolidate the issuing of change to a single trip that covers a plurality of cash drawers. A report or some other form of work instruction may be compiled such that a single person can refill the change in each drawer as required in a single trip, thus avoiding having to make several trips to replenish change in multiple cash drawers hence saving time. It is possible that any such work instruction not only lists the cash drawers that require change, but also creates a list of the total amount of the change required for all drawers, thus ensuring that all required amounts and types of change are carried during a single replenishment trip.

The addition of the change is then detected in the manner as shown in Figures 4 and 5, but may also be automatically reconciled to the instruction to issue change, thereby automatically recording that a change issue has taken place, and so simplifying the transaction balancing process. Otherwise, a manual indicator will need to be recorded at this point to record (for later reconciliation purposes) that an amount of change has been added.

Furthermore, as mentioned above it is common practice for the issuance of change to be linked to a previous removal of other, higher value denominations - known as a change buy'. The system as mentioned above may preferably be able to reconcile that a 'cash out' of the cash drawer previously detected is linked to a 'cash in' at a later time to form a 'change buy' action, but only within a certain time and/or within other constraints e.g. POS terminal position. It may be reasonable to assume, for example, that in an establishment with a large number of POS terminals that a cashier at one end of the checkout line cannot conduct a change buy action with a cashier at the other end of the checkout line. If these conditions are not met the data is logged and a warning signal is raised instead.

Another optional feature is for the intelligent cash register, or the system containing the intelligent cash register, to detect and store a first occurrence when it is low in a first cash denomination, and to detect and store a subsequent reduction in a second cash denomination together with a corresponding increase in the first cash denomination (the reduction and increase may not necessarily be the same value) as an overall 'change buy' involving the 'purchase' of more of the first denomination. As it is possible for a significant period of time to pass, and possibly several transactions to be processed, between a high denomination cash item being removed for a 'change buy' and for the change to actually be deposited in the cash drawer in return, an iterative procedure may be employed to reconcile cash additions with previous cash removals.

With the ability to track the rate of cash item usage and cash item addition within an intelligent cash register drawer, not only is it possible to predict when additional change is needed, but also to predict when a skim needs to be requested. In both cases a predetermined threshold low level and high level of cash items will need to be set by a supervisor, and this threshold may be based upon historical experience or be dynamically adjustable automatically, depending upon the level of usage of the intelligent cash register. It is also possible for thresholds to adapt to predicted trading conditions such as those applicable at certain times of the day.

In the case of a network of intelligent cash registers, it is possible to combine change issue and skim requests into a Picking list' of instructions so that one trip to replenish or skim cash register drawers may service a plurality of cashier positions.

It is further noted that whilst the foregoing description is concerned with the cash value situation at a checkout terminal wherein generally cash is received by a cashier from a customer, it is noted that the same method and principle of operation may be used in reverse for a situation wherein cash is expected to be given by a cashier to a customer, such as a refund desk for example. It is obvious that the same scope for error and/or fraud exists in such a scenario as in those described above, and so the same techniques and methods are also desirable to detect and identify any such occurrences.

Claims

Claims 1. In a cash-handling environment, a method of rationalizing a

difference between successive cash counts, the cash counts using CASH data items, the method comprising: storing CASH data items generated by successive cash counts; obtaining from the stored CASH data items a cash value for successive CASH data items; determining a difference between successive cash values; comparing the cash value difference to a predetermined cash amount; and identifying the cash value difference as being legitimate when the cash value difference corresponds to the predetermined cash amount.
2. In a cash-handling environment, a method of rationalizing a difference between successive cash counts, the cash counts using CASH data items, the method comprising: storing CASH data items generated by successive cash counts; obtaining from the stored CASH data items a cash value for successive CASH data items; obtaining from the stored CASH data items the cash composition of successive CASH data items; determining the difference between successive cash values; determining the difference between successive cash compositions; identifying a difference in successive cash compositions as legitimate providing the difference between successive cash values is within a predetermined threshold.
3. The method of Claim 1 or Claim 2 wherein legitimate identification is also dependent upon the composition of the cash value difference.
4. The method of any preceding Claim wherein legitimate identification is also dependent upon any change in cash value or cash composition being within predetermined margins.
5. The method of Claim 4 wherein the predetermined margins are set according to previous rationalizing actions.
6. The method of any preceding Claim wherein a transaction value is removed from the cash value difference before identification is carried out.
7. The method of any preceding Claim wherein legitimate identification is further dependent upon any change in composition being restricted to changes in a predetermined set of denominations.
8. The method of any preceding Claim wherein failure to determine legitimate identification results in the issuance of an error report and/or a warning.
9. The method of any preceding Claim wherein failure to determine legitimate identification results in the prevention of further CASH and/or POS data being generated. r
10. The method of any preceding Claim wherein the CASH data items are generated by an intelligent cash register and the POS data items are generated by a POS terminal.
11. The method according to Claim 10 when dependent upon Claim 9 wherein prevention of further CASH data generation is achieved by locking the intelligent cash register.
12. The method according to Claim 10 when dependent upon Claim 9 wherein prevention of further POS data generation is achieved by locking the POS terminal.
13. A method of ratifying a first sum of cash taken from an intelligent cash register with a second sum of cash deposited in an intelligent safe, the method comprising providing communication means between the intelligent cash register and the intelligent safe; sensing the removal of the first sum of cash from the intelligent cash register; storing the CASH data relating to the removal of the first sum of cash; sensing the depositing of the second sum of cash in the intelligent safe; storing the CASH data relating to the depositing of the second sum of cash; comparing the first sum of cash taken from the intelligent cash register with the second sum of cash deposited in the intelligent safe; providing a successful ratification signal upon determining the two sums of cash are within predetermined limits of each other.
14. A method according to Claim 13 wherein comparison between the two sums of cash comprise comparing their cash composition.
15. A method according to Claim 13 wherein comparison between the two sums of cash comprise comparing their cash value.
16. A method according to Claim 13 wherein upon expiry of a predetermined time delay between sensing the removal of the first sum of cash and sensing the depositing of the second sum of cash results in prevention of further removal and/or depositing of cash.
17. A method according to Claim 13 wherein successful ratification between the two sums of cash is further dependent upon legitimate identification of any differences between the two sums of cash according to any Claim out of Claims 1 to 12.
18. Apparatus for rationalizing a difference between successive cash counts, the cash counts using CASH data items, the apparatus comprising: means for storing CASH data items generated by successive cash counts; means for obtaining from the stored CASH data items a cash value for successive CASH data items; means for determining a difference between successive cash values; means for comparing the cash value difference to a predetermined cash amount; and means for identifying the cash value difference as being legitimate when the cash value difference corresponds to the predetermined cash amount.
19. Apparatus for rationalizing a difference between successive cash counts, the cash counts using CASH data items, the apparatus comprising: means for storing CASH data items generated by successive cash counts; means for obtaining from the stored CASH data items a cash value for successive CASH data items; means for obtaining from the stored CASH data items the cash composition of successive CASH data items; means for determining the difference between successive cash values; means for determining the difference between successive cash compositions; means for identifying a difference in successive cash compositions as legitimate providing the difference between successive cash values is within a predetermined threshold.
20. The apparatus of Claim 18 or Claim 19 wherein the means for legitimate identification also depends upon the composition of the cash value difference.
21. The apparatus of any one of Claims 18 to 21 wherein the means for legitimate identification also depends upon any change in cash value or cash composition being within predetermined margins.
22. The apparatus of Claim 21 wherein the means for legitimate identification are adapted to set predetermined margins according to previous rationalizing actions.
23. The apparatus of any one of Claims 18 to 22 further provided with means for removing the transaction value from the cash value difference before identification is carried out.
24. The apparatus of any one of Claims 18 to 23 wherein the means for legitimate identification is further adapted to depend upon whether any change in composition is restricted to changes in a predetermined set of denominations.
25. The apparatus of any one of Claims 18 to 24 further provided with means for issuing an error report and/or warning upon failure to determine a legitimate identification.
26. The apparatus of any one of Claims 18 to 25 further provided with means for prevention of further CASH and/or POS data being generated upon failure to determine a legitimate identification.
27. The apparatus of any one of Claims 18 to 26 further provided with an intelligent cash register for generating the CASH data items and a POS terminal for generating the POS data items.
28. The apparatus according to Claim 27 when dependent upon Claim 26 further provided with means to prevent generation of further CASH data by locking the intelligent cash register and/or an intelligent cash register drawer.
29. The apparatus according to Claim 27 when dependent upon Claim 26 further provided with means to prevent generation of further POS data by locking the POS terminal from further use.
30. Apparatus for ratifying a first sum of cash taken from an intelligent cash register with a second sum of cash deposited in an intelligent safe, the apparatus comprising: means for providing communication means between the intelligent cash register and the intelligent safe; means for sensing the removal of the first sum of cash from the intelligent cash register; means for storing the CASH data relating to the removal of the first sum of cash; means for sensing the depositing of the second sum of cash in the intelligent safe; means for storing the CASH data relating to the depositing of the second sum of cash; means for comparing the first sum of cash taken from the intelligent cash register with the second sum of cash deposited in the intelligent safe; means for providing a successful ratification signal upon determining the two sums of cash are within predetermined limits of each other.
31. The apparatus according to Claim 30 wherein the comparison means for comparison of two sums of cash is further adapted to compare their cash composition.
32. The apparatus according to Claim 30 wherein the comparison means for comparison of the two sums of cash is further adapted to compare their cash value.
33. The apparatus according to Claim 30 further adapted so that expiry of a predetermined time delay between sensing the removal of the first sum of cash and sensing the depositing of the second sum of cash results in prevention of further removal and/or depositing of cash.
34. The apparatus of Claim 30 further provided with ratification means adapted so that successful ratification between the two sums of cash is further dependent upon legitimate identification of any differences between the two sums of cash according to any Claim out of Claims 18 to 29.