They fully completed the count of one station before beginning to count the next one. This included having the auditors and Ms. Medina sign page four of the Form 3294. With the Answer, Respondent submitted another set of computer generated printouts listing trust and suspense items for the three offices, as of April 9, 1998. As for security, Respondent argues that the facilities available to Petitioner for storing her stamp stock were adequate. Finally, Respondent contends that Petitioner has not established a sufficient relationship between the overages and the shortages to justify crediting her with the overages.
Petitioner first makes two procedural arguments.
There is no evidence that these steps were followed in this case. As to the merits of the case, Petitioner argues that her superiors failed to provide proper security for the stock. Specifically, she refers to the fact that she was forced to keep the three separate accounts all in the same office, without sufficient secure storage areas to maintain each office's stock entirely segregated from the others. She also faults the methods of the January auditors, specifically that they did not run an adding machine tape of their counts, and that they did not correct some of the apparent discrepancies after she located stock that they had listed as missing. Finally, she argues that she used reasonable care in managing her stamp stock under the difficult conditions she had to work with.