Casino Chip Counterfeiting Incident Report

Use it whenever a chip appears counterfeit, altered, damaged beyond normal wear, or otherwise invalid during a table game, cage transaction, count, or drop process. It is also appropriate when a chip is found outside normal circulation and needs to be evaluated before acceptance. If the issue is only a routine chip condition check with no suspicion, a simpler inventory or cage variance log may be enough.

The employee who discovers the chip should start the report, then a supervisor, cage lead, security officer, or compliance representative can add follow-up details. The person completing the form should be able to describe the chip, the location, and the actions taken without guessing. If your property has a surveillance or AML team, they should be named where their review is required.

It should be used each time a suspect chip is identified, not as a batch summary at the end of the shift. Individual incident records make it easier to preserve evidence, compare patterns, and show a clean timeline for internal review or regulator questions. If multiple chips are found in one event, document them in separate entries or clearly itemize each chip.

This template supports casino compliance programs, internal controls, surveillance review, and anti-money-laundering escalation where applicable. It also helps preserve evidence handling practices expected in regulated gaming environments and supports cooperation with law enforcement or the gaming regulator when a matter is escalated. Your property should align the workflow with its local gaming rules and internal control standards.

Common mistakes include vague chip descriptions, missing serial or unique identifier details, and failing to record who had custody of the chip after discovery. Another frequent issue is skipping witness names or not noting whether surveillance was notified. If the final disposition is left blank, the report loses much of its value for audit and trend analysis.

Yes. You can add fields for your property’s chip artwork, security features, approved denominations, or jurisdiction-specific notification steps. Many operators also add a section for RFID verification, cage reconciliation, or surveillance case numbers. Keep the core chain-of-custody and escalation fields intact so the report remains defensible.

An informal note usually misses the evidence trail, witness details, and escalation record that matter when a suspect chip becomes a larger compliance issue. This template creates a consistent incident file that can be reviewed by cage, security, compliance, and audit teams. It is much easier to search, trend, and defend than scattered emails or verbal handoffs.

Attach photos of the chip, any related transaction slips, count sheets, surveillance references, and evidence bag or container identifiers. If your process includes testing or verification, include those results and the name of the person who performed them. The goal is to make the report self-contained enough that someone reviewing it later can follow the case without reconstructing it from memory.