Helen spent the next several days comparing the letter Peter had written to Daniel with the ledger pages obtained from the archive. Margaret received updates by telephone, each one adding a little more clarity while leaving the central question unanswered.
The account had been used during the proposed property transaction, and a balance had been carried forward after the purchase failed. The later statement described the balance as reconciled, but the supporting documentation was missing. The surviving papers did not show whether the money had been returned, transferred elsewhere, or written off against expenses.
Helen warned Margaret that a discrepancy in old business records did not automatically mean that money had been stolen. Companies sometimes changed account references, moved deposits, or corrected errors years later. The purpose of the review was to establish what the records actually showed.
Margaret understood the distinction, but she could not ignore the effect the uncertainty was having on her family. Daniel had admitted that Peter once discussed the account with him. Vanessa had made inquiries before Margaret's birthday. Both had seemed more concerned about controlling the conversation than resolving the questions.
On Monday morning, Helen called with a new development.
“Lewis Carter has located another document,” she said. “It's a transfer authorization from the period when the account was supposedly closed. Your son's name appears on it, but the signature doesn't look consistent with the other signatures in the file.”
Margaret gripped the edge of the kitchen table.
“Are you saying someone forged his signature?”
“I'm saying the signature requires examination. Lewis doesn't recognize it, and he doesn't remember Daniel signing anything. We cannot conclude that it was forged without further evidence.”
“Can Daniel see it?”
“Yes, but I recommend that we review it together first. I don't want anyone making accusations based on a photocopy.”
Margaret agreed to meet Helen that afternoon.
At the office, the lawyer laid the transfer authorization beside a copy of a school document Daniel had signed as a teenager, which Margaret had brought at Helen's request. The signatures were different in several respects, but the documents had been signed decades apart, and handwriting naturally changed over time.
Helen explained that a qualified document examiner could assess the signature if it became necessary. For now, the most important question was whether the transfer had actually occurred and what supporting records existed.
The authorization listed an amount that matched the balance carried forward in the ledger. The recipient account number, however, was incomplete. A handwritten notation referred to a separate file that had not yet been located.
Margaret studied the page.
“If Daniel didn't sign this, who did?”
“We don't know.”
“Could Peter have signed it on his behalf?”
“Possibly, if he had legal authority to do so. But we have no evidence that he did, and we shouldn't assume that he did.”
Margaret left the office with a copy of the document and a list of questions for Daniel. She wanted to speak with him before the next meeting, but Helen advised her to avoid leading questions that might influence his recollection.
That evening, Daniel arrived alone. He had agreed to review the records and had brought a folder containing documents he had kept from his father's estate.
Margaret welcomed him into the kitchen. She had made soup and placed bread on the table, partly because she knew he would not eat properly when worried and partly because she wanted the conversation to take place in a familiar setting.
They ate for several minutes before she showed him the transfer authorization.
Daniel studied the page, then shook his head.
“I don't remember signing this.”
“You were young when it was created.”
“I know. But I remember Dad asking me to sign things. He always explained what they were for.”
“Could you have signed it without understanding the details?”
“Maybe. But this doesn't look like my signature.”
Margaret waited while he examined it again.
“Do you think someone used your name?” she asked.
“I don't know.”
“Would your father have done that?”
Daniel looked pained. “I don't want to believe he would.”
“Neither do I. But we need to consider every possibility.”
He pushed the paper away.
“Dad was careful with money. He taught me to keep receipts and check statements. If he had needed my signature, he would have asked me.”
Margaret thought of Peter's letter, in which he had advised Daniel not to rely on verbal assurances. Perhaps Peter had discovered the discrepancy after the transfer authorization was filed. Perhaps he had been trying to protect his son from a transaction he did not fully understand.
Or perhaps the signature was genuine and Daniel had simply forgotten.
She refused to settle on an explanation.
“Will you agree to let Helen arrange a professional review?” she asked.
“Yes.”
“Will you provide any other documents you have?”
Daniel nodded.
He opened his folder and removed several old papers, including a bank statement from his early twenties and a letter from Peter about a savings account. The documents did not directly match the disputed account number, but one letter referred to a temporary deposit established during a business negotiation.
Margaret recognized the wording from the old correspondence.
“Why did you keep these?”
“I kept everything Dad gave me. I didn't know whether any of it mattered.”
He looked down at the papers.
“I should have told you when Vanessa found the letter.”
“Yes,” Margaret said. “You should have.”
Daniel accepted the answer without arguing.
For a while, they discussed the practical steps Helen had recommended. Daniel agreed to provide a written statement about what he remembered, including the conversation in which Peter had told him the account was closed. He also agreed not to contact anyone connected with the old company until the lawyer had reviewed the evidence.
Before he left, he asked whether Margaret had received any more information about the lottery ticket.
The question caught her off guard.
“Why are you asking?”
“Vanessa mentioned it. She said the ticket might have been a winning one.”
Margaret looked at him carefully. “The claim is being reviewed.”
Daniel's expression changed.
“Is it worth much?”
“I don't know what the final result will be yet.”
She had deliberately avoided confirming the amount. The lottery authority had not completed the claim, and she did not want the possible prize to distort the family discussion.
Daniel nodded, though his eyes lingered on her face.
“Whatever happens, I hope you use it for yourself,” he said. “You deserve to travel.”
The words were sincere enough that Margaret felt a brief pang of affection. She wanted to believe that the son she had raised was still there beneath the fear and evasions.
“Thank you,” she replied. “That is what I intend to do.”
After he left, Margaret called Helen and told her about the additional documents. The lawyer arranged to review them and said she would contact a document examiner if the signature remained material to the inquiry.
Two days later, Lewis Carter provided another update. He had located a correspondence file containing a letter from Arthur Bell to the former accountant. The letter referred to a transfer made under authority supplied by a family representative. It did not name the representative, but it mentioned that the supporting signature was being held separately.
The letter also said that the transaction should not be included in the final statement until the documentation had been verified.
Yet the final statement had included the amount as reconciled.
Helen regarded the discrepancy as significant. She asked Lewis to preserve the original letter and arranged for copies to be made under the archive's procedures.
Margaret read the letter in Helen's office. The language was formal and cautious, as though the writer wanted to ensure that no one could accuse him of approving an incomplete transaction.
“Arthur knew the paperwork wasn't verified,” Margaret said.
“That is what the letter suggests,” Helen replied. “But we need to know whether the documentation was later supplied. There may be another file that completes the record.”
“Do you think Daniel's signature was used without his permission?”
“I think that is one possibility. I also think we should wait for the remaining evidence.”
Margaret nodded, though waiting was becoming more difficult.
That evening, she received a call from Vanessa.
“I heard you were looking at a signature,” Vanessa said without greeting.
Margaret sat down.
“Who told you?”
“Daniel. He's upset about it.”
“Then perhaps he should speak to Helen.”
“I don't think you understand what this could mean for him.”
“I understand that his name appears on a transfer authorization. I understand that he doesn't remember signing it. I also understand that we don't yet know whether the signature is genuine.”
Vanessa's voice sharpened. “You keep saying you want the truth, but you're putting Daniel through an investigation.”
“I'm trying to establish what happened to an account connected with his name.”
“Why can't you leave it alone?”
“Because Peter left instructions about it, and the original records have now been found.”
There was a long silence.
Then Vanessa said, “Peter made mistakes. He wasn't always as careful as you think.”
Margaret felt a chill.
“What mistakes?”
“I didn't mean anything specific.”
“You mentioned mistakes. What do you know?”
“Nothing that would help you.”
Margaret waited, but Vanessa offered no further explanation.
“Then please stop asking me to ignore the records,” Margaret said. “If you know something relevant, tell Helen. If you don't, let her do her work.”
Vanessa ended the call abruptly.
Margaret remained at the table for several minutes. Vanessa's comment could have been nothing more than anger. It could also have been a clue that she knew more about Peter's involvement than she had admitted.
Margaret wrote down the time of the call and the exact words she could remember. Then she sent the note to Helen.
The following morning, the lawyer called back.
“I think we should ask Vanessa to provide a written account of how she came across Peter's letter and whom she contacted about the old account,” Helen said. “We should do so formally and without making accusations.”
Margaret agreed.
She had reached a point where family loyalty could no longer mean accepting vague warnings in place of evidence. If Peter had made a mistake, she wanted to understand it. If someone had used Daniel's name without his knowledge, she wanted to know who. And if the transfer had been legitimate, she wanted the records to establish that as well.
The truth might hurt. But Margaret was beginning to understand that uncertainty had already done its own damage.
Click here to continue reading: PART 11: Vanessa’s Written Account Introduced a Third Person Whose Name Had Been Missing From Every Earlier Explanation
At Seventy-Three, Margaret Hale Discovered That the People Closest to Her Had Been Making Decisions Behind Her Back
Part 10 of 35
