Action Fraud to be scrapped.
Discussion
Govt announced in the Fighting Crime Plan that Action Fraud is to be binned as it's just completely failing to tackle the crime.
To be replaced by a supposedly improved national fraud and cyber crime reporting service, possibly as part of National Crime Agency.
One worry, apart from it just being more of the same, also the new force within NCA is to investigate the most serious cases. Does this mean smaller issues just get dumped back on local forces when the actual offence could be anywhere.
From my side, the presence of AF just gave local forces an excuse to fob off complaints into the big black hole of the AF system, never to be seen again.
My own experience with AF, credit card scammed, no idea how they got details, local force didn't want to know as happened online, scammer used paypal to buy event tickets in Netherlands. Bank waste of space apart from finally accepting that this was not down to us, after quite a tussle. My own investigations from information provided by PayPal, who at least did try to help, resulted in eventually tracking the name, address of the scammer, a town not been near for a couple of decades, their email and phone numbers, and then from social media that the individual and family were actually in NL around the time of the event, enough for a knock on the door surely? AF response, NFA, not even a request to the local force for a knock.
To be replaced by a supposedly improved national fraud and cyber crime reporting service, possibly as part of National Crime Agency.
One worry, apart from it just being more of the same, also the new force within NCA is to investigate the most serious cases. Does this mean smaller issues just get dumped back on local forces when the actual offence could be anywhere.
From my side, the presence of AF just gave local forces an excuse to fob off complaints into the big black hole of the AF system, never to be seen again.
My own experience with AF, credit card scammed, no idea how they got details, local force didn't want to know as happened online, scammer used paypal to buy event tickets in Netherlands. Bank waste of space apart from finally accepting that this was not down to us, after quite a tussle. My own investigations from information provided by PayPal, who at least did try to help, resulted in eventually tracking the name, address of the scammer, a town not been near for a couple of decades, their email and phone numbers, and then from social media that the individual and family were actually in NL around the time of the event, enough for a knock on the door surely? AF response, NFA, not even a request to the local force for a knock.
Sorry forgot to give a link, The Times but should work.
https://epaper.thetimes.co.uk/the-times/20210729/2...
https://epaper.thetimes.co.uk/the-times/20210729/2...
It should have been called something like 'The National Fraud Register'. Calling it 'Action Fraud' when it's remit seems to have been primarily data gathering, not 'action', was misleading and inevitably led to disappointment and complaints.
Hopefully the new entity will actually take action against fraud.
Hopefully the new entity will actually take action against fraud.
My experience of Action Fraud is the same as yours even though mine involved a family member in UK, 2 UK banks, £90k, all documents from the bank accounts involved and a statement from one of the banks, yet Action Fraud said they wouldn't do anything. In fact, I can't remember AF ever doing anything useful. Whatever the new national fraud and cybercrime reporting structure ends up being, at worst, it'd be the same thing rehashed, but with a bit of luck, there might be some improvement.
mac96 said:
It should have been called something like 'The National Fraud Register'. Calling it 'Action Fraud' when it's remit seems to have been primarily data gathering, not 'action', was misleading and inevitably led to disappointment and complaints.
Hopefully the new entity will actually take action against fraud.
Its primary remit wasn't being a register though, it was deciding what was a crime and what wasn't a crime, then referring the crimes for further investigation. What led to its downfall was the staff making fun of victims of fraud by calling them morons, refusing to classify blatant crimes as crime and other blatant failings of its remit, not disappointment over its primary function. Hopefully the new entity will actually take action against fraud.
QuickQuack said:
Its primary remit wasn't being a register though, it was deciding what was a crime and what wasn't a crime, then referring the crimes for further investigation. What led to its downfall was the staff making fun of victims of fraud by calling them morons, refusing to classify blatant crimes as crime and other blatant failings of its remit, not disappointment over its primary function.
Our experience was that they did decide our reported incident was a crime, and got the local Police fraud team to visit.They did ask me what I expected from the visit... I said "Nothing", they said "Well you won't be disappointed then"
To be fair, it was a cybercrime from Eastern Europe or Russia. There was no chance of them actually being able to act against the purpetrators. No money was paid over, but files were encrypted and a ransom demanded (mostly recovered from off-line backups).
They took some computer data away with a view to see it there was anything that could help others - I don't have a problem with that.
I got the impression they were snowed under with reports and couldn't deal with all of it.
QuickQuack said:
mac96 said:
It should have been called something like 'The National Fraud Register'. Calling it 'Action Fraud' when it's remit seems to have been primarily data gathering, not 'action', was misleading and inevitably led to disappointment and complaints.
Hopefully the new entity will actually take action against fraud.
Its primary remit wasn't being a register though, it was deciding what was a crime and what wasn't a crime, then referring the crimes for further investigation. What led to its downfall was the staff making fun of victims of fraud by calling them morons, refusing to classify blatant crimes as crime and other blatant failings of its remit, not disappointment over its primary function. Hopefully the new entity will actually take action against fraud.
And it has diverted attention from the police, who were the ones intended to actually do something about the crimes.
efcgriswold said:
I always thought action fraud was run by the city of London police. Think that came from a friend so not the best source.
It's overseen by City of London, but the running of it is outsourced to Concentrix, which for all we know might be a US version of C(r)apita. 
Gets some variable reviews to say the least.The first time I used a new credit card was over the phone to book a hotel in London. Before I used it again a purchase appeared for a £1200 fridge/freezer. Obviously a member of the hotel staff. The nearest police station referred me to Action Fraud who said nothing could be done. Credit card refunded my money. Fridge/freezer had been delivered to a empty house in London.
mac96 said:
I wasn't trying to excuse its failings! But names matter, and if you give the impression that you are there to act when you are actually a data/triaging process, it's a poor starting point.
And it has diverted attention from the police, who were the ones intended to actually do something about the crimes.
Fair enough. And it has diverted attention from the police, who were the ones intended to actually do something about the crimes.
You're absolutely right about the name giving a certain amount of hope, it definitely made me think that there was a high chance of seeing my money back because some "action" would be taken. It then comes down as a crushing disappointment to find out that the name of the organisation is missing "in" at its start. anonymous said:
[redacted]
The fraudster hit on a company I had bought from a few times in the past. As they used my email address the company allowed them to change the delivery address. Accessing my account gave me the delivery address. A friend living a few miles away went to look & found an empty house. QuickQuack said:
My experience of Action Fraud is the same as yours even though mine involved a family member in UK, 2 UK banks, £90k, all documents from the bank accounts involved and a statement from one of the banks, yet Action Fraud said they wouldn't do anything. In fact, I can't remember AF ever doing anything useful. Whatever the new national fraud and cybercrime reporting structure ends up being, at worst, it'd be the same thing rehashed, but with a bit of luck, there might be some improvement.
Police should have dealt with that if there was a named / known suspectMy sons card got nicked and was passed around between local lowlife and used at multiple shops before it was stopped.
As a card theft, it was referred to Action Fraud, but CCTV identified all the well know scroats using I.
A few days after the offenders were charged, Action Fraud sent my son multiple copies of the same letter saying the cases had been filed as there were no suspects and no evidence.
No idea where they were obtaining that info from, but that was the only time he heard from them
As a card theft, it was referred to Action Fraud, but CCTV identified all the well know scroats using I.
A few days after the offenders were charged, Action Fraud sent my son multiple copies of the same letter saying the cases had been filed as there were no suspects and no evidence.
No idea where they were obtaining that info from, but that was the only time he heard from them
Action Frauds role is to record reports. There is another part called NFIB that identifies trends and prioritises cases
It was always excepted that many reported frauds would never be investigated - probably a very large volume. The ones that did get investigated were sent back to local Police
It was always excepted that many reported frauds would never be investigated - probably a very large volume. The ones that did get investigated were sent back to local Police
Bigends said:
QuickQuack said:
My experience of Action Fraud is the same as yours even though mine involved a family member in UK, 2 UK banks, £90k, all documents from the bank accounts involved and a statement from one of the banks, yet Action Fraud said they wouldn't do anything. In fact, I can't remember AF ever doing anything useful. Whatever the new national fraud and cybercrime reporting structure ends up being, at worst, it'd be the same thing rehashed, but with a bit of luck, there might be some improvement.
Police should have dealt with that if there was a named / known suspectForums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff