In the UK, fraud accounts for more than 50% of reported crime; yet less than 1% of police time is spent investigating it.

Several weeks ago, I wrote an article about the UK fraud epidemic, based on a BBC article and think tank report. The overall conclusion was that fraud was not being taken seriously by UK government and law enforcement, and that fraud is seen as "everybody's problem but nobody's priority".

There are several other related materials I have seen recently which would appear to further support the case, including a webinar recently hosted by the University of Portsmouth’s Centre for Counter Fraud Studies (Confronting the Growing Challenge of Economic Crime: Evaluating the Policing Response) and wider media coverage about the UK government excluding fraud from the proposed Online Harms Bill.

The former seemed to confirm fears about the low priority from law enforcement and policymakers, while the latter suggests this will unfortunately remain the case for the foreseeable future.

The webinar was packed with some alarming stats and evidence about the police response to fraud.

Apparently across all UK police forces, 1,455 police staff are dedicated to investigating economic crime of which only 788 are actual police officers, with the rest being civilian staff. Out of the 123,000 police officers across the UK, this represents just 0.6% of police officers targeting criminals perpetrating fraud.

This is despite crime survey statistics from the Office for National Statistics showing that more than 50% of reported crime affecting individuals related to fraud and cybercrime.

Compare this to the banking industry - where one bank recently claimed it had more than 4,000 staff (8% of its total workforce) devoted to tackling financial crime. You read that correctly: the number of people addressing fraud and financial crime at one bank in the UK is more than double that of all UK police forces combined; a truly staggering disparity in resource and priority.

Fraud not ‘sexy’ enough

 The webinar also referenced a report published by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of the Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS), noting one analyst's comment in particular: “Everything is against fraud.  It's not a priority, not sexy, people don't report it, and it is difficult to prove, which takes time, resources and money.” The webinar suggested police forces were "hiding behind Action Fraud", the public-facing body set up to provide a focal point for fraud reporting and law enforcement fraud response. 

 People reporting crimes to Action Fraud believed their case would be investigated and action taken, whereas in practise, the group works with the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB) to ‘package up’ consumer-reported fraud cases into intelligence that police forces can act upon where resources allow.

In another report, HMICFRS noted that the intelligence packages from the NFIB were rarely acted upon by regional forces and that one force categorised 96% of these as requiring ‘no further action’.  This included those with actionable intelligence and investigative leads with a good degree of evidence, including identifying suspects. The webinar concluded that fraud is seen as low priority for police forces and the structures in place to report and respond to fraud are not working effectively.

The widely reported decision by the government to exclude fraud from the proposed Online Harm Bill – which is aimed at forcing social media platforms and online firms to improve internet safety in areas such as hate crimes, online abuse and bullying – is another cause for concern.

Missed opportunities

Despite calls from campaigners and lobbying from UK Finance, the government has opted to exclude fraud from the bill. This seems like a missed opportunity, with the ever-growing issue of payment scams driving the UK fraud epidemic. Scams have been an ever-present feature of Covid lockdown, conducted on an industrial scale by organised crime groups duping naïve and vulnerable consumers into giving their savings away to fraudsters.

 A high proportion of these scams are conducted through social media platforms and email, and the companies that profit from these activities should be held more accountable for any fraud that results from this. However, as we've seen from the previous evidence, there doesn’t seem to be enough impetus from the government to take action.

 Starling Bank founder and CEO Anne Boden pointedly claimed banks “seem to have become the underwriter” of all kinds of fraud, giving other players, such as social media platforms a free pass.

As we look ahead to a post-pandemic, post-Brexit future, UK policy makers will need to ensure we as a nation have the bandwidth to reflect on the UK fraud epidemic and help address some of the questions raised.

Alex Robinson is a Fraud Subject Matter Expert at Featurespace