Whispers about missing stock turned into hard numbers, and an online breadcrumb trail pointed straight to a familiar face.
At a busy automotive distribution hub in Milton Keynes, discrepancies mounted, listings appeared online, and suspicion narrowed. When investigators moved in, they found more than anyone expected, both at work and behind a suburban front door.
How an online side hustle unravelled
Managers at a parts distribution centre in Milton Keynes noticed an unusual pattern: valuable components disappearing from shelves while identical makes and models surfaced for sale on a well-known marketplace. The overlap looked less like coincidence and more like strategy. Each listing mirrored stock that should have been in the warehouse.
That digital trail led to a seller profile linked to an employee, 42-year-old Konrad Labinski. Officers staged a workplace intervention and detained him while he was attempting to remove further goods. A search of his home in Padstowe Avenue uncovered a cache of car parts stacked and stored with care, far beyond anything resembling a one-off lapse.
Police recovered over 1,000 automotive components, with an estimated value around £1m, and returned them to the firm.
Investigators believe the scheme ran for roughly two years. The man at the centre of it had served the company for more than two decades, a detail that added a sting to the discovery. He later admitted theft by employee.
A breach of trust inside a well-oiled operation
Internal theft rarely starts loud. It begins with access, routine, and trust. In this case, a long-service employee allegedly used everyday familiarity with stock movements and shipping patterns to lift parts without tripping alarms. The gradual nature of the losses meant the figures drifted under radar until volumes grew too large to ignore.
Detectives from Milton Keynes CID moved quickly once the account link emerged. The decisive arrest at work preserved evidence in transit and helped secure the larger haul found at the house. Officers described the investigation as fast-moving, with the courts remanding the suspect immediately, a signal of the seriousness attached to abuse of position.
The court jailed Labinski for two years, ending a career that once came with a good salary, company benefits and a car.
What the court heard
Prosecutors set out a straightforward narrative: systematic removal of stock, resale via an online marketplace, and a warehouse tally that no longer balanced. After his arrest, Labinski made no comment during police interviews. The sentencing recognised a prolonged breach of trust and the commercial scale of the losses. Following his guilty plea, the judge imposed a two-year custodial term.
All recovered items went back to the distribution centre. The total value, gauged by market rates and inventory data, came to about £1m. While not every stolen component was necessarily accounted for, the cache located by police was extensive, spanning parts for multiple makes and models.
What investigators say this case shows
Police pointed to the human impact within the business: colleagues left stunned, management forced to tighten controls, and knock-on effects for customers awaiting backordered parts. They also stressed the personal cost to the offender. A secure, long-standing job vanished overnight, along with the perks that came with it. Prison followed immediately.
A long-serving insider exploited routine access, but digital fingerprints on a public marketplace gave the game away.
Red flags businesses can watch for
Most firms do not expect a veteran employee to defraud them, which is why internal safeguards matter. The following signs often surface before the full scale of a problem becomes clear:
- Stock variances that persist despite clean delivery records
- Unusual overtime or after-hours access tied to inventory handling
- Frequent write-offs of high-value items without clear cause
- Customer complaints about delays when systems show items in stock
- Online listings that mirror your catalogue, down to part numbers or bundles
Inside theft by employee: a quick guide
| Location | Milton Keynes distribution centre |
| Offender | Konrad Labinski, 42 |
| Tenure at firm | Over 20 years |
| Method | Removal of parts and resale via an online account |
| Recovered items | More than 1,000 parts |
| Estimated value | About £1m |
| Timeline of theft | Believed to be around two years |
| Outcome | Two-year prison sentence; items returned |
Why this matters to you
If your business holds valuable, portable stock, insiders can bypass the protections that deter casual thieves. Rotating duties, dual-control for high-value items, and exception reporting that flags patterns rather than single incidents can all reduce blind spots. Cross-checking active marketplace listings against your live inventory—by part number or product description—can surface suspicious overlaps.
What happens next
A confiscation process under proceeds-of-crime powers often follows in cases like this, targeting earnings from illicit sales. Insurance may cover certain losses, but policies usually require evidence of robust controls and timely reporting. Firms also tend to run internal reviews after such events, tightening access logs, revisiting CCTV coverage around picking areas, and upgrading audit trails.
If you suspect internal theft
- Preserve evidence: secure CCTV, access logs and inventory reports without tipping off suspects
- Tighten access immediately: adjust permissions for stockrooms and loading bays
- Conduct a discreet stocktake: focus on fast-moving and high-margin items
- Monitor online marketplaces: track your parts numbers and distinctive bundles
- Seek advice: consult HR, legal and police before confronting staff
The Milton Keynes case highlights how small anomalies can add up to seven figures. A two-year span, more than 1,000 parts, and one trusted insider created a hole big enough to disrupt operations and damage confidence. The digital marketplace that enabled quick sales ultimately supplied the clues investigators needed.
Automotive components hold strong resale value, especially when boxed and traceable to popular models. That makes them attractive to thieves and easy to ship. Firms that build simple, repeatable checks into daily routines—barcode reconciliations, blind counts, and marketplace sweeps—tend to detect problems sooner and cut the window for harm.



Hard to believe a 20-year veteran could siphon off £1m without tripping alarms. How often were stock variances reviewed against marketplace listings? Feels like basic exception reporting and role rotation wouldve flagged this sooner. Were stock write-offs clustered by the same SKU’s or shifts?