A gentleman revealed that he noticed an employee had retained a portion of the funds allocated for buying a padlock, only becoming aware of the shortfall after he personally verified the item’s cost.
He explained that he entrusted the employee with ten thousand naira to acquire the lock. Shortly after, the worker came back with the padlock and handed over one thousand naira as change.
Assuming the exchange was correct, he accepted the lock and the one‑thousand‑naira change without doubting the amount.
Later, while out shopping for something else, he chose to confirm the price of that identical padlock.
Price verification uncovers new doubts
He recalled, “I dispatched an assistant to fetch padlocks, supplying him with ten thousand naira.” He added that the assistant soon returned with the lock and one thousand naira in change.
He continued, “Today I went out to purchase another item and decided to check the cost of that same padlock. I was informed it was seven thousand naira. This indicates the worker kept two thousand naira and returned only one thousand to me. I’m puzzled as to why he didn’t take the full three thousand.
Online reaction divided
The narrative has generated considerable buzz on social platforms, with numerous users expressing astonishment over the alleged incident.
Several commentators urged individuals to confirm prices before delegating purchases, whereas others contended that, if true, the employee’s behavior constituted a violation of trust.
Others highlighted that the story underscores the need for openness in routine exchanges, while noting that the allegations are based solely on the man’s version of events.
Refer to the image below for clarification.
About the Author
