Wilma鈥檚 Transition Society of Chilliwack filed a notice of civil claim on May 2 in B.C. Supreme Court against two former employees for misappropriating at least $1.4 million.
The defendants, Kathleen Mosa, the former executive director of Wilma鈥檚 Transition Society, and her daughter Erin Mosa, a former 鈥渉omelessness prevention and support worker鈥� were terminated by the society on April 9, for 鈥渏ust cause鈥� due to unauthorized transactions, the notice of civil claim states.
The pair had been in the society鈥檚 employ since 2009. Wilma鈥檚 Transition Society provides transition house, second stage housing and other supports to women and children fleeing interpersonal violence.
It was a complaint received by the society in August 2023 that led to the process of filing a civil claim in court against the former employees.
The complainant alleged that Kathleen and Erin had misappropriated funds, which led to further investigation and discovery by society officials. They found that the pair had, since at least April 2020: 鈥渇raudulently, wrongfully, and secretly, either individually or in concert鈥� charged personal purchases to the society鈥檚 credit card and bank accounts, the claim states.
The wrongful charges and transactions, unrelated to the society鈥檚 business, included cash withdrawals, personal cheques, e-transfers, as well as purchases of: groceries, gas, dining, furniture, clothing, electronics, gift cards, airfare, hotels, beauty products, alcohol, casino, and more. There were also purchases from stores such as Bootlegger, Old Navy, Smash + Tess, SportChek, Best Buy, and Apple.
The claim states Wilma鈥檚 Transition Society is bringing action against their ex-employees for: 鈥渕isappropriation, conversion, conspiracy, fraud, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, negligence, gross negligence and breaches of fiduciary obligations.鈥�
As the executive director since 2012, Kathleen Mosa was a 鈥渒ey employee鈥� privy to the financial details, and 鈥渁fforded discretion and autonomy鈥� to act in ways that could hurt the society, 鈥渟uch that the society was vulnerable to Kathleen in her exercise of that discretion,鈥� the claim noted.
The unauthorized transactions were either for Kathleen鈥檚 or Erin鈥檚 鈥減ersonal benefit,鈥� it alleged, or for that of their immediate family, and were not justified as business expenses.
鈥淭he unauthorized transactions did not relate to any legitimate purpose pertaining to the society鈥檚 business or affairs, did not further the society鈥檚 mandate, were not justified business expenditures and were not in the best interests of the society,鈥� the claim continued.
There has been no evidence of any repayment by the defendants for any of the transactions.
鈥淭he extent of Kathleen and Erin鈥檚 misappropriation is not known. Since April 1, 2020, the society estimates that the unauthorized transactions total $1,397,704.鈥�
Since most of the society鈥檚 funding comes from government sources through funding agreements, and the wrongful actions of the two former employees 鈥渉ave caused the society to violate their contribution agreements鈥� and 鈥渟ignificantly鈥� impacted the organization鈥檚 future and financial viability, the claim states.
鈥淎s a result of unauthorized transactions Kathleen or Erin, or either one of them have been unjustly enriched to the corresponding deprivation of the society,鈥� it continued, adding there鈥檚 鈥渘o juristic reason entitling Kathleen or Erin to that enrichment.鈥�
Under 鈥渞elief sought鈥� the claimants are seeking against the defendants, jointly and severally, damages in an amount to be proven at trial 鈥渆qual to the total amount鈥� of the $1.4 million in unauthorized transactions. They seek damages for breach of trust, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and more.
The society is also claiming the right to any property from the proceeds of the transactions, the right to trace all proceeds to their assets. In addition to a preservation order to preserve the value of their assets, they鈥檙e seeking that the pair make restitution to the society, and disgorge any benefits.
The actions of the two ex-employees are described in the claim as 鈥渕alicious, high-handed, callous and reprehensible,鈥� which entitles the society to punitive damages, it argues, and the audit and legal expenses were cited under the 鈥渟pecial damages鈥� section.
READ MORE:
The defendants have 21 days to file a response to the civil claim.
