Modern Insurance Magazine Issue 62: The Fraud Supplement

“Insurance fraud
is a dynamic beast”
Donna Scully, Carpenters Group
Enhancing Special
Investigations:
The Role of Modern Case
Management in Insurance
Catching Up
with Donna Scully,
Carpenters Group
A Catalyst
for Action
with Ursula Jallow, IFB
Fraud Recovery
Litigation:
A Powerful Tool in the Fight
Against Insurance Fraud
IFED:
‘Collaboration
at its Finest’
with DCI Tom Hill

WELCOME
Amelia Barlow, Editor
Fraudulent activity within the
insurance industry is a tale as old as
time. However, modern advancements
in technology, coupled with a cost-ofliving
crisis and economic headwinds
around the globe, have undoubtedly
created a lively present day fraud
landscape.
In our eagerly anticipated ‘Fraud themed’
supplement magazine, we’re delighted to explore
this matter further in conversation with Ursula Jallow,
Director of the Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB). You’ll
find the full transcript of our discussion on p.4,
where we chat about the success of some recent
public awareness campaigns, the wider evolution
of insurance fraud, as well as the developing role
of technology in the detection and prevention of
fraudulent activity.
I was also delighted to sit down with DCI Tom
Hill, Head of the Insurance Fraud Enforcement
Department (IFED) at the City of London Police,
to discuss the role of the criminal justice system in
deterring fraud, the efficacy of existing legislation, as
well as the significance of the industry’s collaborative
efforts in the ever-present fight against fraud. Catch
the full interview on p.6!
I am so grateful for the unique insights of our
valued contributors, all of whom bring their skills,
knowledge and enthusiasm to the fore in order
to present us with a series of perceptive thought
leadership articles and astute Q&A interviews.
Rachael Pearson, Project Manager
Of course, I would warmly welcome your feedback
across all relevant channels using the details below.
Until next time, however, happy reading!
Amelia Day Barlow
Editor
Modern Insurance Magazine
@AmeliaModernIns
amelia@charltongrant.co.uk
Rachael Pearson
Project Manager
Modern Insurance Magazine
rachael.pearson@charltongrant.co.uk
2 Fraud Supplement

INTERVIEWS
4
6
A Catalyst for Action, with Ursula Jallow, Director of the
Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB)
In such a dynamic risk landscape, fighting insurance fraud is
increasingly vital. Modern Insurance Magazine recently sat
down with Ursula Jallow, Director of the Insurance Fraud
Bureau, to discuss the evolution of insurance fraud, recent
public awareness campaigns, as well as the developing role
of technology in the detection and prevention of fraudulent
activity.
IFED: ‘Collaboration at its Finest,’ with DCI Tom Hill, Head of
the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) at City of
London Police
Tackling insurance fraud often requires both public and private
sectors to work in harmony together. Modern Insurance
Magazine recently caught up with DCI Tom Hill, Head of the
Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) at the City
of London Police, to discuss the impact of recent awareness
campaigns, the efficacy of existing legislation, and the
significance of the industry’s collaborative efforts in the everpresent
fight against fraud.
FEATURES
8
11
14
17
20
Q&A with Lior Koskas, Digilog UK
Modern Insurance Magazine catches up with Lior Koskas, CEO
at Digilog, to discuss the benefits of their innovative technology,
the accredited training courses on offer, and their recent Fraud
Supper Club at Home Grown, London.
Delivering a great customer experience and detecting fraud
doesn’t have to be a double-edged sword
Digital automation has brought many gains to our industry,
including an enhanced customer experience and increased
insurer efficiency. However, these advantages have come at
a cost, with a significant increase in the volume of fraudulent
claims. Kaye Sydenham, Product Owner - Anti-Fraud at Verisk,
reports.
Catching Up with Donna Scully, Carpenters Group
Carpenters Group are setting a gold standard for industry
collaboration in the fight against insurance fraud. We recently
caught up with their Director, Donna Scully, to further discuss
her role in this process, the education of Carpenters Group case
handlers, and the significance of an affiliate membership to the
Insurance Fraud Bureau.
Enhancing Special Investigations: The Role of Modern Case
Management in Insurance
FRISS work with P&C insurers to provide the most implemented
solution for trust automation across the full policy lifecycle.
Martyn Griffiths, Sales Manager UKI, reports on the role of
modern case management in the insurance industry, looking at
the capabilities that all insurers should be looking out for in a
successful fraud case management solution.
Q&A with Matt Gilham, Whitelk
Modern Insurance Magazine catches up with Matt Gilham,
Director of Whitelk, to draw upon his vast knowledge of fraud
prevention in insurance. In this exclusive Q&A, we discuss fraud
prevention strategies, digital transformation, and the impact
of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) on the
insurance fraud landscape.
23
26
28
31
34
36
38
Fraud Recovery Litigation: A Powerful Tool in the Fight
Against Insurance Fraud
In most fraudulent claims, there are usually two key drivers
- need and greed. Peter Oakes, Head of Counter Fraud
at Crawford & Company, discusses how the economic
uncertainty of recent times has driven cases of opportunistic
fraud.
Q&A with Paul Ridge, SAS
Modern Insurance Magazine caught up with Paul Ridge,
Head of Insurance – UK at SAS, to discuss the amplified risk
of fraud in light of increasing digitisation across the industry,
the pressures that Fraud Investigation Teams are facing at
the moment, and some key findings from the recent Coalition
Against Insurance Fraud survey.
AI vs. Fraud
Fraud is a constantly changing threat to the insurance
industry, with a significant impact on the bottom line,
customer satisfaction, and society as a whole. Selim
Cavanagh, Director of Insurance at Mind Foundry, considers
how AI might just hold the key to effectively combatting
fraudulent activity within the insurance industry.
Insurance Providers can be First Responders in the Fight
Against Fraud
Martyn Mathews, VP personal and commercial lines, UK and
Ireland, reports for LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Insurance,
looking at how we can balance fraud with the effective
assessment of risk and customer service excellence.
Charles Taylor: ‘An entire fraud ecosystem’
Modern Insurance Magazine catches up with Bobby Gracey,
Global Head of Counter Fraud at Charles Taylor, to discuss
their inimitable blend of human skill and automation, their
widespread product offering, and their unique approach to
fraud investigation across multiple aspects of insurance.
Navigating the complexities of Insurance Fraud in the UK
and Unmasking Current Trends
Insurance offers protection and peace of mind to millions
of individuals and businesses. However, the insurance
landscape in the UK is not without its challenges, one of the
most significant being motor insurance fraud. David Booker,
Managing Director at DLB Investigations Ltd, elaborates.
How can the insurance industry manage the internal risk of
fraud?
Employees within the insurance sector are no different
to any other sector when it comes to dishonest conduct.
Tracey Carpenter, Insider Threat Manager at Cifas, explains
how organisations can put the relevant defences in place to
protect against the insider threat of fraud.
Contributed by
Fraud Supplement 3

A Catalyst for Action
In such a dynamic risk landscape, fighting insurance fraud is increasingly vital.
Modern Insurance Magazine recently sat down with Ursula Jallow, Director of the
Insurance Fraud Bureau, to discuss the evolution of insurance fraud, recent public
awareness campaigns, as well as the developing role of technology in the detection
and prevention of fraudulent activity.
QHi Ursula, thanks so much for your time today!
You have been working in the insurance industry
and fighting financial crime for over 25 years now
- a fantastic achievement! How have you seen the
intricacies of insurance fraud evolve throughout this
time?
AI wouldn’t say that the nature of fraud has inherently changed much.
However, insurers are now a lot better at recognising fraud, and
the societal evolution of digital advancements has enabled the same
fraud to occur, but in different ways.
The industry is much better equipped to deal with fraudulent activity than
it ever has been. In the past, very few insurers had dedicated fraud teams,
let alone systems to detect it. However, the majority of insurers now have
this monitoring in place; they’re funding the Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB)
and they’re funding the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED),
a specialist branch of City of London Police. The industry’s commitment to
protect innocent consumers has come on leaps and bounds, despite the fact
that fraudulent activity inherently remains the same.
Fundamentally, the digital perspective has been our primary catalyst for
action. One third of our cases under investigation right now relate to ghost
brokers, and we all know that this type of criminal predominantly operates
through the use of social media platforms. Police forces around the country
are encountering the same issue, beyond fraud and into wider aspects of
criminal activity as well. It can’t be ignored, and as an industry, we are really
focused on getting better at managing the type of fraud that digital platforms
facilitate.
QYou were permanently appointed Managing Director
of the Insurance Fraud Bureau back in January 2023,
where your initial priority has since been around
shaping, planning and publishing the IFB’s new threeyear
counter-fraud strategy. Tell me more about
these plans!
AFundamentally, the overall strategy is all about modernising the IFB.
It was established in 2006, initially to share data sets in a simple
and efficient way. Many insurers have naturally evolved in this time,
incorporating their own ways of identifying and managing fraud in-house. So,
working in line with the industry and following extensive consultation, the IFB
would like to expand its membership to make this offering more inclusive.
We’d like to incorporate firms which support the industry in fraud detection,
and invite other parts of the industry to come on board as well who may
have previously been exempt. We are currently looking at the art of the
possible in this respect.
In terms of our existing network, we want to focus on giving our members
what they want, as opposed to a continuation of what they’ve always had.
We’d like to decommission some of our legacy technology as part of this
process; we’ve got different technology for different things, and we want to
simplify this and make sure that it works better for our members, with selfserve
capabilities and higher quality data output.
Our final strand of the strategy lies around prevention. The industry have
wanted to implement an effective prevention campaign for a really long time,
educating the UK public around what insurance fraud is and the subsequent
ways to avoid falling victim to this type of criminal activity. The IFB have
recently targeted the general public in a number of campaigns, an example of
which is around the concept of moped fraud, complete with airtime on the
national news. We’ve had 25 further Cheatline reports made directly to us on
the back of this - with insurers reporting an increase in new reports, too - as
policyholders retrospectively realise that they have fallen victim to this type
of fraud in the past.
QOpportunistic fraud appears to be increasing more
than many other aspects of the fraud landscape. On
the subject of awareness campaigns, how are you
educating the public about the potential long-term
impacts?
AOver the last quarter, we’ve been running a number of different
campaigns based around a variety of insurance products. The
fundamental message is one of education, teaching the UK public all
about insurance fraud, what it is, and how it differs from a genuine claim. In
light of the present cost-of-living crisis, customers may be more tempted or
under pressure to commit fraud in an opportunistic way.
However, if we can focus some of our energy on awareness and prevention
campaigns, we can really demonstrate the implications of fraudulent activity
and reiterate the fact that insurance fraud is not a victimless crime. If a
member of the public is found to have committed insurance fraud, and if the
evidence is there to support it, they will be placed on the Insurance Fraud
Register. Many people don’t know this, nor are they aware of the role that
IFED play in the criminal justice aspect. The Insurance Fraud Register can
prevent someone from accessing insurance policies in future, and we are
really hoping to get the message out there and encourage people to think
twice about these consequences before they submit a false claim.
4 Fraud Supplement

with Ursula Jallow
QAs cyber threats increase, we know that outdated
legacy technology can affect the success of counterfraud
strategies. Since decommissioning your own
legacy technology is a priority over at the IFB, how
are you seeking to educate, encourage and influence
positive change for your members in this regard?
AFrom our perspective, insurers are ultimately the ones that will make
their own decisions on their legacy technology. For many insurers,
this is certainly a priority for them too, and they are following suit in
order to make positive changes to their infrastructure.
New IFB platforms will go some way to help insurers more broadly, but we
do recognise that it’s not a case of ‘one size fits all’. With these platforms, we
hope to provide new product solutions and positively improve the quality of
our data.
Not all insurers will have the data you’d expect them to have, so it’s also about
the enrichment of that, as well as creating support provisions for members
who want to implement this kind of strategy. It’s a complex piece of work;
every insurer is different, and we also have the broker market to consider as
well. We can help, but internal decisions will always lie with the organisations
themselves.
QSo, what more needs to be done to address this issue
around improving access to data, and the quality of
that data? How can we tackle the perception that
sharing data is a competitive risk?
AThe majority of the industry are very good at detecting fraud,
particularly in comparison to where the market was 25 years ago!
Organisations are now advising their policyholders about fraudulent
activity in order to prevent them from becoming victims, and we have
specialist areas of the industry that remain responsible for addressing and
tackling fraudulent behaviour. Massive strides have been taken on the Motor
and Personal Lines side of the industry, and I’m confident that they are doing a
really great job even at pricing and underwriting stage.
However, each insurer will face their own challenges across a diverse book
of business and a variety of product lines. At the IFB, we’re happy to help our
members with their fraud prevention and detection strategies, supporting
them in making their processes and controls more robust. It’s important to
acknowledge that the industry has moved beyond their focus on claims in
the fraud prevention space, opening the conversation to address policy and
underwriting as well. In theory, if we’re getting it right in those foundational
stages, we won’t see fraudulent claims come through on the other end.
It’s also important to question the digital side of things when we’re considering
an insurer’s customer journey. Some insurers are not there yet with their
digital processes, whereas others are heavily digitalised and need to consider
how fraud relates to that platform, as well as how they’re sourcing their
policies and claims.
In relation to concerns around competitive risk, the Financial Conduct
Authority (FCA) expects insurers to have appropriate systems and controls
in place, and part of that relates to the sharing of data. From a regulatory
perspective, compliance with this aspect is pivotal. Moreover, from an
insurer perspective, if you’re sharing data in the way that you should be, this
intelligence will work to the benefit of the consumer. Consumers rightfully
expect us to do the right thing and band together to protect them against
the risk of fraud. With this in mind, industry compliance with data sharing is
imperative for us to tackle insurance fraud as a collective market.
QYou work very closely with law enforcement as well
as those within the insurance ecosystem. How has
successful cross-sector collaboration influenced the
work you do at the Insurance Fraud Bureau, and
where might improvements still be made?
AYes! Working closely with IFED, we supply additional evidence to
aid investigations when needed, and we also make referrals to IFED
on behalf of insurers. We haven’t always been as joined up as we
could be in terms of our communications, but we’ve really harnessed our
partnership in recent awareness campaigns and continue to dedicate time to
the promotion of each other’s work. There’s always scope to become more
efficient together, and we’re committed to continuously improve our working
relationship wherever opportunities are identified.
QFinally, is it possible to predict ‘trends’ in the fraud
landscape, so those across the industry might begin
to adopt a proactive, rather than reactive, approach?
What key elements of progress should the industry be
looking out for over the next few years?
APredictions can be really difficult to make! However, I do believe
that our reliance on digital platforms will only increase. For example,
if we look back at the growth and prevalence of social media over
the last decade, we can get a decent idea of what we’re going to have to keep
up with as an industry. I’m sure the focus around servicing the consumer on
their terms will continue, and with this comes a need for fraud detection
tools which are as up-to-date as possible.
Our latest industry threat assessment reveals that Artificial Intelligence is a
concern, with ChatGPT already presenting some tough challenges. That being
said, these tools all form a part of how we’re using digital platforms to live
our lives in the modern age, and we will need to keep our finger on the pulse
to monitor the effects of AI and Machine Learning going forward.
Ursula Jallow,
Director of the Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB)
Fraud Supplement 5

‘Collaboration at its Finest’
with DCI Tom Hill
QDetective Chief Inspector Hill,
thank you so much for joining me
today! Let’s start by talking about
the work you do over at the Insurance
Fraud Enforcement Department within
City of London Police. What are your key
objectives?
AThanks Amelia, great to meet you!
Our key objective in the first
instance is to tackle insurance
fraud and provide a deterrent for criminals
operating in this area. The department
succeeds by alleviating some of the
pressure on regional law enforcement,
particularly those who don’t have the
capacity to adequately tackle this type of
crime themselves.
For the foreseeable future, our objectives
are aimed at three key pillars. Enforcement
is our primary focus; we must continue
to provide an effective response for
insurance fraud victims, performing our role
professionally and independently. This will
take the form of positive judicial outcomes,
alternative outcomes, and diversionary
tactics.
Disruption is also a key area, relating to
the mapping and interference of organised
crime groups as well as lower level,
opportunistic fraudsters. We use a relatively
new tactic in the form of cease and desist,
which is a strong way of diverting insurance
fraud criminals away from the criminal
justice system and closely monitoring
their offending. ‘Operation Mirage’ is our
dedicated arm of the team responsible
for tackling the online landscape, working
closely and successfully with social media
companies in order to take down profiles
which represent a threat.
Our third key objective lies around
protection and prevention. Publicising our
work and promoting awareness of what we
do is vital. We’re delighted to have recently
secured funding to continue our work past
December when our initial agreement with
the ABI comes to end. This will allow us to
work on keeping our reoffender rates low,
and remain at the forefront of the fight
against fraud within the insurance industry.
QOn the subject of awareness, a
national campaign was launched
earlier this year to highlight the
consequences of opportunistic fraud,
with motor fraud seeing the biggest
increase. It’s obviously still very early
days, but how has the campaign been
received so far?
AWe chose to look at opportunistic
fraud through consultation with the
industry, after seeing a 60% increase
predominantly in light of the cost-of-living
crisis. The campaign was a great way to
get some national coverage; it did really
well on social media and within our partner
networks, too.
Sadly, I don’t think this is an issue that
will be going away anytime soon, but
I’m confident that the messaging of our
campaign is strong and long-lasting. We’ve
certainly seen a spike in operational activity
as a consequence of this work, particularly
as we raise our profile and create further
awareness of our key objectives with the
general public.
QEvidence shows that much
fraudulent activity relates to
organised crime. Why does
insurance fraud remain such a prevalent
target for these crime networks? And as
we move towards a cashless society, is
cash still a priority for the crime networks
that continue to operate within financial
services?
AAlthough we do target organised
crime groups, opportunistic fraud
is certainly most prevalent in
insurance compared with other types of
fraud. However, we do deal with the full
spectrum at IFED, and sadly, organised
crime groups will always operate through
exploiting the weaknesses, processes and
systems in place across the insurance
sector.
We respond by mapping the activity
of these organised crime groups and
recording disruptions against them, which
enables us to access additional tactics
and resources within the law enforcement
network - particularly those which might
not be in place to the same extent for other
types of fraudulent activity.
In relation to cash, we’re certainly still
seeing cases where cash is seized from
fraudsters before it has been converted
to money laundering. We actually had a
successful cash seizure earlier this year,
with over £100,000 seized from a ghost
broker. So, yes – we do still see cash
being used as a way to launder funds,
and we frequently embrace the skills of
our financial investigators to monitor the
movement of said funds. It’s a resource
that we’re delighted to have - facilitating
confiscation and, most importantly,
providing compensation for insurer victims.
QDo you feel that existing
legislation is fit for purpose when
it comes to prosecuting fraud as
it evolves and takes on different
shapes?
AIn short, yes, existing legislation is
absolutely fit for purpose when it
comes to tackling fraud. The Fraud
Act and the Financial Services and Markets
Act are both powerful pieces of legislation;
we also prosecute under money laundering
legislation to gain positive outcomes for
victims of fraud. In terms of what we’ve
got coming down the tracks, I’m eagerly
anticipating the Online Safety Bill, a law
6 Fraud Supplement

Tackling insurance fraud often requires both
public and private sectors to work in harmony
together. Modern Insurance Magazine recently
caught up with DCI Tom Hill, Head of the
Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED)
at the City of London Police, to discuss the impact
of recent awareness campaigns, the efficacy of
existing legislation, and the significance of the
industry’s collaborative efforts in the
ever-present fight against fraud.
which will add to our protection efforts
against fraudulent activity across social
media platforms and online search engines.
However, there is extreme pressure on the
criminal justice system at the moment,
and a successful prosecution now requires
our case to be fully ready for trial, even
if the defendant has submitted an early
admission to the offence. This means that
there’s a lot of extra emphasis on getting
the disclosure right, and working with the
Crown Prosecution Service to progress and
prosecute each case accordingly. We need
to use innovative tactics in order to take
pressure off the criminal justice system
wherever possible, and find alternative
outcomes beyond that of a prison sentence.
If a case needs to be prosecuted, of
course we will prosecute that case. But it’s
important for us to deal with cases outside
of the parameters of the criminal justice
system at the moment if it is possible for
us to do so.
QHow are victims of insurance
fraud being supported in the face
of rising fraud cases, particularly
those with vulnerability
characteristics?
AI don’t know anyone in the industry
who doesn’t want to do more to
protect and support victims of
fraud. Empowering the public complements
the Government’s fraud strategy, but better
support and communication with fraud
victims is also a huge priority for the team
at IFED. We are part of a working group at
the General Insurance Fraud Committee
(GIFC), which looks into how we can better
support victims of insurance fraud and
ensure that the provisions currently in place
are fit for purpose - all with a view to create
more effective wraparound support across
the full industry ecosystem.
This fits in well with our National Economic
Crime Victim Care Unit (NECVCU), which
has now been rolled out across all police
forces in England and Wales. While this
focuses on fraud and cybercrime, perhaps
the NECVCU hasn’t had much opportunity
to focus on insurance fraud yet because in
this instance, victims are often insurers –
as opposed to vulnerable members of the
public who have had their identity stolen,
for example. A logical next step would be
about understanding how we could better
work with these teams to provide more
assistance in the face of insurance fraud
cases, particularly for those most at risk.
QIn relation to insurance fraud,
what improvements would
you like to see with regards to
collaboration and data sharing between
the public and private sectors? What
existing strategies are already in place
and proving the most effective?
AThe whole concept of IFED as
it exists now demonstrates
collaboration at its finest. We’re
frequently in attendance at in-person and
remote industry events, giving talks about
the work we’re up to in the fraud arena and
talking to industry professionals about the
support available. City of London Police
are really leading the way in this area; the
collaboration in place between IFED and
industry is envied across Europe and around
the world. Our close working partnership
with the Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB)
also drives this success, particularly when
we’re serving cease and desist notices and
carrying out further surveillance to ensure
that fraudulent activity stops as a result.
The data sharing principles currently in
place allow us to escalate our response if
cease and desist notices are being ignored.
It’s a relationship that has stood the test
of time, and one that will continue to bring
longevity to the success of our operations.
I also work with the London Fraud Forum,
which is a public/private partnership to
combat fraud across all sectors. There’s
the law enforcement side of the board
which I represent, juxtaposed with the
private sector influence as well. It creates
a fantastic dynamic and presents ample
opportunity to understand the wider
threat and share our core knowledge.
Collaboration is key in the fight against
fraud; we’re more likely to be victims of
fraud than any other type of crime, and
the only way to tackle that is through
partnerships of this kind.
QLastly, what are your predictions
for the remainder of this year
with regards to the insurance
fraud landscape?
AI think we’re going to see a
significant investment in cyber
skills. 89% of fraudulent cases are
cyber enabled, so building that expertise
and working with the private sector to
enhance fraud detection and prevention
is key. The technology that has been
developed to tackle fraud in the insurance
industry is fascinating, and for IFED to
harness this knowledge and understand
more of that will be vital for us. Within IFED,
we’ll probably allocate more resources to
that area in the very near future in order to
address a growing demand in this space.
Finally, I expect IFED to partner with
insurers and look further into the
disruption of commercial insurance fraud
over the coming months - commercial
being an area of fraud which hasn’t
traditionally been addressed so much by
law enforcement. We’ll also be keeping
our finger on the pulse when it comes to
inflation and cost-of-living issues, factors
that will continue to influence the likelihood
of fraudulent activity.
DCI Tom Hill,
Head of the Insurance Fraud Enforcement
Department (IFED) at City of London Police
Fraud Supplement 7

with Lior Koskas, Digilog
Modern Insurance Magazine catches up with Lior Koskas,
CEO at Digilog, to discuss the benefits of their innovative
technology, the accredited training courses on offer, and
their recent Fraud Supper Club at Home Grown, London.
8 Fraud Supplement

Hello Lior, always great to catch up!
Q Let’s start by talking about Digilog and the amazing work
you guys do in the fight against fraud. How do these efforts
apply to the insurance industry specifically?
Digilog offers the latest generation of technology solutions,
utilising voice risk analysis for risk identification and information
A validation. Combined with AI and cognitive interviewing techniques,
our technology represents an innovative and promising approach
to enhancing fraud detection and risk management throughout the
insurance industry.
Our Digital intelligence Voice Analysis (DiVA) software is designed to
complement existing processes. It integrates seamlessly with insurers’
current systems and workflows, reducing disruption and enhancing the
adoption of technology. Of course, this is crucial in the insurance industry
especially, where thousands of interactions occur daily. The primary focus
is twofold – we concentrate on risk identification, as well as contributing
to a better customer experience by expediting legitimate claims and
reducing the need for lengthy investigations.
The ability to deploy our technology across areas where real-time
conversation/information validation is required also makes it extremely
versatile. The live environment for identifying and challenging risks can
be a game-changer, and using voice data in real-time can provide
valuable insights into the authenticity of claims or applications. This can
help identify potential fraud or misrepresentation as soon as it occurs.
Early detection of potential fraud can also prevent payouts on illegitimate
claims, and reduce overall losses for insurance companies.
Q
A
Your Digital intelligence Voice Analysis (DiVA) software
utilises voice data to identify and combat fraudulent activity.
Tell me more about that!
High-level: DiVA, drawing upon sophisticated algorithms,
incorporates ML capabilities to automatically calibrate and
establish a baseline of the subject’s voice pattern. DiVA will then
analyse potential fraud risk in real-time transactions, based on open and
unrestricted conversations, to detect patterns and anomalies that may
indicate fraudulent behaviour.
The subject’s voice is represented as a digital waveform pattern.
Initially, the ‘calibration’ phase will obtain digital raw data from the
voice spectrum (broken down into two second segments) to create an
individual’s unique ‘truthful’ baseline from known facts, like personal
details. DiVA will then analyse and compare further segments to the
baseline throughout the exchange.
In doing so, DiVA’s risk-identification algorithms will automatically identify
honest and potentially dishonest statements in real-time - enabling the
fast-track of genuine customers, as well as pinpointing any relevant risk
issues that require further validation or investigation.
Q
A
What benefits does software such as DiVA present for
businesses and organisations within the insurance
ecosystem?
To understand the benefits, we first need to recognise motivating
factors in relation to insurance fraud. Economic fluctuations and
the current ever-rising cost of living can impact insurance fraud
rates. Individuals may be more inclined to commit fraud during times of
economic hardship in order to obtain financial gains. Unfortunately, many
people regard insurance claims as a soft and easy target. Equally, when
the economy is stable and prosperous, the motivation for fraud often
decreases.
That being said, as technology advances, both fraudsters and insurance
companies adapt their methods. New technologies enable more
sophisticated fraudulent schemes, yet on the flipside, developments
in technology can also provide insurers with improved fraud detection
and prevention tools. As a result, there is a continuous battle between
fraudsters and insurance companies, with the aim of outsmarting one
another in a bid to shape the fraud landscape.
Ultimately, we want to assist insurance companies by providing
enhanced fraud identification and prevention capabilities, whilst fostering
innovation. This is where DiVA comes into play, providing voice risk
analysis output in conjunction with behavioural narrative-integrity
indicators to validate truthful and potentially deceptive statements. Such
a solution enhances the validity of customer-agent interactions, bringing
technology and human capabilities to the forefront in the fight against
fraud. This combination leverages the strengths of both to create a more
robust anti-fraud approach.
Digilog are also accredited to host Fraud Awareness
Training Courses to the wider insurance/broker industry.
Q Tell me more about this, and the variety of options on offer.
AAll businesses within the insurance market are faced with
the pervasive threat of fraud, hence there is a necessity for
organisations to invest in training their workforce in the fight
against this growing risk. Fraud poses a significant challenge across
the entire insurance landscape, and a failure to address it can have farreaching
consequences.
We aim to support organisations by providing skill-enhancement
opportunities through bespoke training and the opportunity to obtain
further qualifications, on top of exposure to our cutting-edge technology.
Appropriate training for insurance personnel who interact with the
system and seamless integration with their workflow are critical for the
successful adoption of the technology.
Our accredited training programmes are a great way of ensuring that
fraud awareness training is standardised across an organisation. Training
programmes are modular in design, with courses customised and
tailored to suit client requirements. We offer courses around Introduction
to Fraud, Risk Screening & Conversation Management Techniques,
as well as Interviewing & Fraud Investigations Techniques, for new or
existing members of staff.
In recent years, we have dedicated substantial time and investment
into transposing our training material into an ergonomic eLearning
platform whilst streamlining modules and content (along with digitalised
supporting handouts). This has enabled us to provide training support for
remote workers, mitigating requirements for travel and onsite disruption
by facilitating online, flexible training, nationwide and internationally, with
significant cost savings.
Q
Earlier this year, you hosted the inaugural Digilog Fraud
Supper Club at Home Grown, London - the purpose of
which was to discuss the evolution of fraud following
continuous economic downturn in the UK market. Tell me more
about the key takeaways from this event.
AYes – this was a fantastic event, and something that we are
certainly looking to repeat after such a productive discussion!
We invited attendees from varying insurance and fraud-related
backgrounds. It was the perfect venue and a relaxed setting in which to
invite debate - we thank those that were in attendance for their valuable
contributions and insight, which led to number of engaging discussions,
with a particular focus on the cost-of-living crisis and its subsequent
impact upon insurance fraud, as well as the use of technology to
mitigate negative outcomes.
Indeed, the cost-of-living crisis has far-reaching impacts on individuals
and society as a whole. It can contribute to various economic and social
challenges, and financial pressure is a significant driver that can lead
some individuals to consider fraudulent activities as a means to alleviate
their financial burdens. This includes insurance fraud, which can take
various forms such as fraudulent claims, providing false information on
insurance applications, or staged accidents.
It is crucial for insurers, MGAs and brokers to prioritise the quality of
insurance arrangements and actively work to identify, combat and
eradicate fraudulent claims. Fraudulent activities can manifest not
only during the claims process, but also at the inception of a policy.
Our discussions merely reiterated the need for a comprehensive and
cautious approach when reviewing insurance applications, with key
considerations such as data analytics, Know Your Customer (KYC),
industry collaboration, training and awareness, as well as technological
solutions.
Lior Koskas,
CEO, Digilog UK
Fraud Supplement 9

Helping businesses
make better
decisions.
Machine Learning
Artificial Intelligence
to analyse & validate
risk in a telephone or
video conversations.
Our unique software enables
the fast & accurate validation
of genuine customers whilst
identifying key risk issues
associated with a:
Claim
Dispute
Application
Find out more at
digiloguk.com

Delivering a
great customer
experience and
detecting fraud
doesn’t have
to be a doubleedged
sword
Digital automation has brought many
gains to our industry, including an
enhanced customer experience and
increased insurer efficiency. However,
these advantages have come at a
cost, with a significant 61% increase in
opportunistic fraudulent claims.
With the cost-of-living crisis putting more pressure on households,
the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) believes that
growing numbers of otherwise honest people are inflating claims to
ease financial difficulties. From opportunistic customers inflating
claims, to organised criminal rings staging elaborate scams, fraud
eats into insurers’ bottom lines, ultimately driving premiums up for
honest policyholders.
Whether you’re an insurer, a supplier, broker or third-party
administrator, fraud is a growing threat that costs the industry
billions each year. So, how can we prevent fraudsters from abusing
new technology, without losing the benefits it brings to customers
and insurers alike?
Gaps and opportunities that fraudsters are
exploiting today
While organised fraud remains a serious issue, insurers reported a
concerning 61% increase in opportunistic fraud over the past year –
costing the industry £1.1bn in 2022. Motor insurance was the most
common type of opportunistic fraud reported to IFED, accounting
for over half of all cases.
Continued on p13
Insurers are also feeling the pressure of rising costs in motor
claims, amounting to £2.5bn paid out in the second quarter of this
year. There’s also the added strain of new Consumer Duty regulatory
requirements, not to mention paying out claims fairly and quickly
to honest policyholders – all while trying to weed out fraudulent
activity!
The Whiplash reforms have had an initial positive impact for
insurers. £602mn of the payout in motor claims was in the
personal injury space, down by 8% in the same period last year.
The extension of Fixed Recoverable Costs (FRC’s) to cover most
personal injury claims up to £100,000 in value could also reduce
legal costs for insurers and claimants, removing financial incentives
for legal firms to inflate hours.
Fraud Supplement 11

Continued from p11
However, this could also lead to an inflation of claims values
by some legal firms, with researchers seeing a rise in ‘cynical
conveyor belt processes’ that entirely fabricate or exaggerate
injuries. So, while government reforms may be reducing
claims payouts, fraudsters are now shifting focus to exploit
other areas of insurance instead.
IFED also reported that property insurance fraud was
the second most common type of opportunistic fraud,
accounting for 29% of reports. Commercial and residential
property insurance fraud are both seen as high risk for
insurers today due to the amount of ‘unknowns’ compared to
motor or personal injury, and the possibility of high value that
it could bring to fraudsters.
In one instance, a customer from south London was charged
with fraud by false representation after submitting claims
for the same television on two home insurance policies. In
another instance, IFED officers cautioned a claimant when
they detected edited invoices from a hotel to inflate the costs
following water damage to their home.
Fraud in the digital age – what does it look like?
Insurers are deploying Anti-Fraud technology, like analytics
and AI, to spot red flags and detect suspicious patterns in
underwriting and claims. But fraud evolves rapidly, often
finding new ways to exploit emerging technology itself.
As much as a digital claims journey can improve customer
experience, fraudsters are exploiting this by using chatbots
to impersonate claimants, rapidly filing fraudulent claims at
scale. Fraud rings leverage dark web forums to trade stolen
customer data and coordinate sophisticated scams.
With the rise of AI technology, the industry has also seen
a rise in ‘shallow fakes’ - claims documents that are
manipulated rather than fully fabricated. Some shallow
fakes are altered images of alleged accidents, injuries or
property damage to exaggerate losses, while others can be
used to manipulate bank statements, medical records and
repair invoices to make higher value claims. Deepfake videos
represent the next frontier, allowing fraudsters to generate
fake footage that is extremely difficult to distinguish from
real events.
But the increased automation of claims and new technology
is certainly not going away - and neither should it, considering
all the benefits it can bring to an insurer and customer.
So, how do we combat this ever-evolving fraud?
We must ensure that our fraud data analytics and technology
remains one step ahead of the fraudsters.
Verisk’s suite of Anti-Fraud solutions already provides
insurers with the capacity to detect fraud at every stage of
an insurance policy or claim, in every product line, in both a
proactive and reactive way.
Managing intelligence is a critical aspect of claim
investigations, and the Verisk Intelligence solution meets this
need through an entity storage system designed to capture
all of the ‘known’ entities in real-time (people, companies,
addresses, vehicles, phones, etc) that might relate to fraud,
with a secure data depository for counter-fraud teams.
Verisk’s Analytics Anti-Fraud solution takes a proactive
approach, using analytics and predictive modelling to identify
potential fraud as well as new and evolving trends.
Verisk’s Anti-Fraud solutions are designed to be highly
scalable, with a modular interface framework backed up by
Verisk’s market expertise and data science teams. We fight
evolving fraud whilst continuously improving the system.
Digital media forensics using AI technology
We’ve also invested in digital media forensics, which uses
AI to identify fraud and manipulation in digital media files
such as photos and documents. We’ve recently launched our
Forensic Image Service in the UK across three categories:
binary forensics, non-binary forensics, and advanced
forensics.
Binary forensics helps to detect images that have been
re-used or sourced from the internet. Non-binary forensics
examine the metadata of an image, such as the date, time,
and location that the photo was taken. Those details can
help to determine if a loss is legitimate or not. Advanced
forensics uncover modifications to documents through
the deep examination of structure contents, as well as the
manipulation of images by analysing pixels and identifying
noise patterns that the human eye can’t detect.
For one insurance property adjuster, FIS detected £1mn in
fraudulent claims from images submitted over a two-year
period, meaning that these claims had a 16% increase in
costs. For another insurer, 9% of 81,000 images analysed
through Forensic Image Service were duplicates, and over
700 unique claims out of 4,000 analysed were found to be
suspected (or actual) fraud.
The ultimate benefit of forensic technology is not just for
detecting fraud, but also for processing legitimate claims
faster. Insurers can be confident in paying meritorious claims
quickly, which boosts customer satisfaction, shortens cycle
times, and reduces costs.
The fight against fraudsters persists –
and evolves
Insurance fraud will continue evolving as new risks and
technologies emerge. From opportunistic fraudsters to highly
organised criminal groups, the motivation to defraud insurers
will persist.
Insurers are taking the fight to the fraudsters through
collaboration, as well as by harnessing data and analytics,
optimising detection workflows and raising public
awareness. Fraud is not a victimless crime,
costing customers thousands of pounds
in fines or jail time. As such, Verisk
will continue to invest in emerging
Anti-Fraud technologies to fight
this battle.
Get in touch with the Verisk
team at neil.garratt@verisk.
com to find out more about
how our Anti-Fraud
solutions can help
your business.
Fraud Supplement 13

CATCHING UP
with Donna Scully, Carpenters Group
Carpenters Group are setting a gold standard for industry collaboration in the fight
against insurance fraud. We recently caught up with Donna Scully to further discuss
her role in this process, the education of Carpenters Group case handlers, and the
significance of their affiliate membership to the Insurance Fraud Bureau.
QHi Donna, thanks so much for your time
today!
The Fraud Unit at Carpenters Group works
closely with their insurer clients to identify (and
strategise against) the rising threat of fraud.
Where have your key priorities sat lately in
terms of fraud and fraudulent activity?
AThe current economic climate and cost of
living crisis have undoubtedly fuelled an
increase in opportunistic fraud. Exaggerated
and contrived claims are a threat across all heads of
loss, including injury, credit hire and vehicle related
damages. Carpenters Group work closely and
collaboratively with our insurer clients to identify
and challenge organised and opportunistic fraud
alike.
We warn clients about the adverse impact of
fraud - both around those committing it and also
innocent premium paying motorists who end up
paying more because of it.
QAwareness is key! How does fraud factor
into the education and training of your
in-house case handlers?
AOur case handlers are passionate about
fighting fraud. They are our first line of
defence, and training our case handlers on
how to spot the signs of fraud is a key part
of our training programme.
We have developed our own claims development
programme for our in-house claims team, and fraud
plays a central role. As affiliate members of the
Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB), and working closely
and collaboratively with our insurer partners, we
are also able to provide our case handlers with
insights around the latest trends and risks.
QWith increased digital transformation
comes an increased risk of vulnerabilities
and exposure to possible fraudulent
activity. However, technology can also work
in our favour when it comes to identifying
suspicious fraud triggers.
How are you embracing technology in relation
to the fight against fraud, and how are
you continuing to balance this with human
sensibility?
A
“Having the right people with the right skills,
using the right technology” is a Carpenters
Group philosophy. The right technology
is an enabler, and must be supported with the
appropriately trained, experienced and passionate
people when it comes to the fight against fraud.
Our counter fraud teams and case handlers are
skilled in using technology to detect and prevent
fraud. This includes analysing data washed against
industry databases, utilising telematics data
throughout the claims journey, and harnessing
technology to identify ‘deep fakes’.
QYou are the Chair of the Insurance Times
Fraud Charter, which has been running
for over 10 years now. What does this
role entail, and where does your focus lie
at the moment?
A
My
involvement with the Fraud Charter goes
back over 10 years. As then Chair of the
Motor Accident Solicitors Society (MASS),
my manifesto was to try and link the
industry up more by fighting fraud
collaboratively.
At my first Conference, I invited renowned antifraud
champion, the late Richard Davies from AXA,
to talk about my plans. As you’d imagine, he was
excellent, and he agreed with my agenda that
we have to leave competition at the door when
14 Fraud Supplement

Donna Scully, Director,
Carpenters Group
it came to fighting fraud. We both thought of the
greater good, especially around protecting innocent
policyholders.
By way of reciprocation, Richard invited me to the
new Insurance Times Fraud Charter, sponsored by
AXA. I was there as the Chair of MASS and as a
claimant lawyer, so suffice to say, there was no red
carpet put out for me! That did not deter Richard,
and like me, he felt you had to have everybody
round the table to have a true debate and break
down barriers.
When he got ill and AXA were no longer sponsoring
the Charter, I took over the position of Chair, as
well as the sponsorship side of things. I often
hope that Richard is impressed with what we have
achieved. We have many very important anti-fraud
experts in attendance, talking openly and working
collaboratively to share data, information, and to
fight fraud in a joined-up way. We wish he was still
here, and he will always be missed by us all.
Chairing, sponsoring and being a part of the Fraud
Charter is great for Carpenters Group in terms of
being an active part in the fight against fraud. Our
Head of Defence and our Director of Claims Strategy
both attend, too.
QCarpenters Group is an affiliate member
of the Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB).
How does this membership encourage
and nurture industry collaboration in the fight
against fraud? What does this partnership look
like in practice?
AGetting affiliate membership of the
Insurance Fraud Bureau took a while. We
had to go through in-depth due diligence to
show that fighting fraud was at the centre of all we
do, as well as demonstrating that our technology
and data protection methods are robust.
Our affiliate membership encourages fraud
prevention through sharing knowledge, as well as
the latest intelligence, between members, all of
whom work collaboratively towards our shared goal
of detecting and preventing fraud.
Our counter fraud teams meet regularly with the
IFB and their members to discuss cases, emerging
threats and trends, share intelligence and develop
counter fraud strategies.
QInsurance fraud is a dynamic beast. With
your finger on the pulse, how do you
foresee the future of fraud evolving in
the coming years?
AThe IFB are the industry lead on coordinating
all matters in relation to fraud. We receive
daily uploads of key attractors, IFB reports,
Application Fraud, Cheatline Intelligence and more
in a generic data feed, which merges directly into
our claims system, Hotspot reports, Miscellaneous
Intelligence, Operation Intelligence, network
reports and SRA data.
In terms of evolving technology, one would expect
to see an earlier identification of fraud through
mechanisms such as voice recognition, especially
at FNOL. Machine Learning will also play a part
though data collection, particularly as we see more
vehicles carrying telematics data.
The key areas of investigation at present involve
Claimant Solicitors acting without instruction, cost
layering, exaggeration, and medical exaggeration.
We are paying particular attention to induced,
contrived and staged collisions occurring in North/
North West London involving motorcycles ridden
by couriers, and liaising with the wider industry
on these matters via the IFB’s platform. We are
also actively reviewing layering of injuries and
rehabilitation, with tactics specifically targeting this
area for such claims as tinnitus.
Notwithstanding technology advancements,
collaboration really is the key to successfully
fighting fraud – and Carpenters Group are at the
very forefront of that.
Fraud Supplement 15

MEMBER
Fearless fraud prevention, in collaboration with you
Find out more:
www.carpentersgroup.co.uk

ENHANCING
SPECIAL
INVESTIGATIONS:
The Role of Modern Case Management in Insurance
FRISS work with
P&C insurers to
provide the most
implemented
solution for trust
automation across
the full policy
lifecycle. Martyn
Griffiths, Sales
Manager UKI,
reports on the role
of modern case
management in the
insurance industry,
looking at the
capabilities that all
insurers should be
looking out for in
a successful fraud
case management
solution.
Over the last 20 years, the insurance
industry has taken a more focused
approach to countering the fraud that
impacts their bottom line - embracing
new organisational structures, processes,
technologies and sources of data that
can help to prevent and detect fraud.
More recently, the pace of technological
progress means that insurers have been
investing heavily in new technology
to suit this very purpose. In turn, an
increase in detection capabilities places
an increased demand on the Special
Investigations Unit. We have seen SIUs
achieve over 45% gain in productivity,
alongside the ability to handle three
times the case volume with the same
number of staff. Attending the recent
Altus Consulting launch of their
whitepaper ‘Service Disruption: Next
Stop for Claims’, I was particularly struck
by three well-made points:
1. The customer has to be at the
heart of your decision making and
processes, with the new Consumer
Duty rules focusing on good, rather
than just fair, outcomes.
2. The claims department is in a
perennial state of transformation.
3. Don’t just focus on the ‘how,’ focus on
the ‘why’ and the ‘what’.
Let’s examine the case for modern Case
Management Software through this lens.
The ‘why’
1. Investments in counter fraud
technology detection demand a
return. As you detect more fraud,
there are more cases for the SIU to
review and investigate. Ultimately,
the return on investment for your
improved detection solutions will
only be realised when fraud is proven,
or when the claimant/policyholder
walks away. It follows that increased
detection volumes means a need for
more capacity.
2. The customer is still your customer,
even if fraudulent activity if
suspected. Not all referrals result in
an investigation and proven fraud. If
it is a false positive, you need a slick
process to get the claim or policy
back on track as soon as possible.
A customer whose journey is
interrupted is a potential complaint
(or even a loss of that customer)
waiting to happen.
3. Feedback is truly a gift - although
sometimes we don’t like what
we hear! In the fraud detection
world, feedback is also an absolute
necessity. Without feedback, our
fraud models and algorithms will
stagnate and become less effective
over time. Gathering effective,
robust and granular feedback on
all referrals and their outcomes is
key to that improvement. If that
data is not readily to hand - or even
better, automated - the road to
improvement will be long and windy.
4. Fraud investigators have a specialist
skill set. Their valuable time needs
to be spent wisely and in the most
productive way possible, not on
laborious and repetitive tasks.
5. Monitoring both workload and
outcomes can be a time-consuming
affair for managers and directors,
especially when they have to dip
in and out of disparate platforms
and spend time pulling together
management reports. That time
could also be spent more wisely.
Fraud Supplement 17

What capabilities
should an insurer
look for in a modern
insurance fraud case
management solution?
1. Integration is a key component
to the successful deployment of
modern insurance fraud software.
Whilst you can experience gains
with a standalone system, true
efficiency comes from integrating a
modern case management system
with your claims or policy admin
system. This ensures the transfer
of data both to and from the case
management solution, reducing
the need for rekeying as well as the
margin for error which can arise as a
consequence.
2. Once data is smoothly transferred,
a modern case management
solution can help you to effectively
manage triage, presenting all of the
information about the claim or policy
to the investigator alongside reasons
for the referral.
By incorporating third party data
connections, the investigator can
gather supplemental information to
more effectively inform next stages,
including the decision to investigate
further or determine whether this
was a false positive. The next action
can then be selected accordingly,
such as the decision to proceed or
return the case to the underwriter /
adjuster, looking after the customer
all the while to make sure that they
are not inconvenienced.
Efficiency is one way to improve
triage, but in addition, you need
to be able to measure productivity
and performance against SLAs.
Transparent dashboards that allow
all interested parties to see the status
of each case - and to intervene when
cases fall outside of SLA’s, reallocating
workloads where necessary - means
that nothing will be allowed to sit
and stagnate.
3. When it comes to insurance fraud
investigations, one size does not
necessarily fit all. Whilst insurers deal
with similar problems and processes
in their investigations, they will all
differ in the way of requirements and
execution.
Line of business will also affect this.
The process flow of a motor theft
investigation is different from a
motor personal injury investigation,
which is different from a home claim
investigation, and so on. To enable
investigators to handle their cases in
the most efficient manner possible,
the ability to tailor workflows to the
specific needs of their business is
vital.
4. To further remove repetitive and
time-consuming activities, providing
the ability to connect to third
party data and retrieve opensource
intelligence to help build
the case is an important benefit.
In addition, certain activities can
be automatically assigned to team
members with the most appropriate
skillset, enabling insurers to focus
key activities on the investigators
with the most experience.
5. Having all of the information about
an investigation in one centralised
place - with all data gathered,
captured and easily accessible -
means that your management
information is at your fingertips,
informing decisions in real time
rather than waiting for weekly
or monthly reports. The granular
information on outcomes means
that effective feedback can be
provided to your detection models.
This can happen automatically if the
solutions are integrated, resulting in
rapid improvement in detection and
precision.
6. The IT department of any given
insurance company is usually
under pressure, faced with
competing priorities from multiple
departments. Consequently, adding
data sources and making small
changes to workflows can often
take a while. SaaS solutions that can
add data sources or deploy low/no
code software are therefore most
desirable, placing you in command
of your own destiny as you manage
your own system to reflect your
ongoing changing requirements.
A system with these attributes enables
you to evolve into a slick and efficient
Special Investigation Unit, handling
cases with maximum efficiency as you
focus your resources on areas where
they will see the most benefit.
Handling more cases allows you to
gain a return on investment in both
sides of the Case Management and
Detection solution - making sure that
honest customers who are subject to
false positives are returned to normal
processes as rapidly as possible,
with good outcomes as required by
Consumer Duty requirements. All
the while, you will be gathering the
feedback you need in order to improve
your models going forward, ensuring a
continuous cycle of improvement.
Martyn Griffiths,
Sales Manager UKI, FRISS
Fraud Supplement 19

with Matt Gilham
Whitelk
Modern Insurance Magazine catches up with Matt Gilham, Director of Whitelk, to draw upon
his vast knowledge of fraud prevention in insurance. In this exclusive Q&A, we discuss fraud
prevention strategies, digital transformation, and the impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and
Machine Learning (ML) on the insurance fraud landscape.
Matt, you left your role as a fraud ‘SME’ within an
insurer to set up your own insurance fraud consulting
Q business. What common questions are you being asked
at the moment?
Headline questions fall into two main categories. Senior
management seem to have a high-level interest in how
A their company compares to its peer group, closely followed
up by an interest in the steps that would be needed to become
market-leading. There’s also a broad and vigorous appetite for better
understanding regarding the fraud-related benefits and risks attached
to AI and Generative AI.
Q
A
They’re challenging questions! Is it right, and really
all that possible, to compare firms and their fraud
prevention strategies?
Well, there are certainly wide variations in approaches and
capabilities across organisations when it comes to managing
insurance fraud. While many common themes, methods, and
strategies exist, there’s no single right way to mitigate fraudulent
activity, but often clear gaps, weaknesses or opportunities instead.
In a sense, assessing an organisation’s maturity in fraud capability
is relatively simple. For example, the relative clarity in strategy
and structure form baseline foundations such as any missing key
components across core operational deterrence, prevention,
detection, investigation, and application of sanction – as well as
maturity in critical enabling capabilities such as case management,
intelligence, and MI.
It’s more complicated to assess how fraud strategy and performance
fits with broader business risk appetite and strategies, including how
counter-fraud performance interacts with crucial business targets
in quotability, conversion, retention, and claims indemnity control
measures (such as third-party claim intervention).
Some organisations have a natural appetite to be sector leaders,
able to demonstrate how they are ‘winning at all’ across fraud,
in combination with other business goals. Others appear more
comfortable being mid-pack in capability – so long as they are happy
that they are not being selected against, and can provide adequate
reassurance to their leadership team!!
Peer comparison on capability alone provides assurance, but leading
counter-fraud performance is all about taking an overall, clear
strategy forward, one that is aligned to the broader objectives of the
business.
You mentioned senior management’s interest in the
benefits and risks of emerging AI in counter fraud. In your
Q view, what impact will AI / ML have on the perennial fight
against fraud?
A
While the impact and timing of AI use by fraudsters is still
open to some debate, in my view, where there is an attractive
‘cash out’ opportunity, fraudsters will almost certainly target a
sector, a company or a process.
I look at this from three primary angles. Firstly, how is AI / GenAI
causing fraud threats to evolve? What vulnerabilities are created as
insurers embed AI in their business-as-usual operations, and finally,
how can counter-fraud technology keep pace?
Focusing on threats, I’ve heard broad debate on the state of play
regarding ‘bad’ GenAI. There are polarised views on whether this
remains an unproven potential risk, or whether it should be managed
as a threat that is already in progress. However, evidence of the
fraudulent use of synthesised speech, chatbots, and scale automated
creation of fabricated documents and images is certainly emerging.
For me, experience is often a great indicator of the near future. In
2004, I dealt with an incident where an employee at a repairer was
using MS Office Paint to fabricate additional damage in vehicle image
photos. Although this incident was simple and quickly detected, it is a
superb example of how fraudsters will misuse digital tools if they are
available.
Looking more to the present, a ChatGPT social media creator recently
released a slide carousel showing how he created a university-level
academic dissertation from simple prompts. His last slide caught my
attention, as it prompted GPT to rewrite the entire document so that
it did not look generated by AI, including an instruction to make a few
spelling mistakes. So, Gen AI is definitely ready and primed to enable
people to cheat!
20 Fraud Supplement

It takes little imagination to see how AI can be used to generate
digital media to support fraud. For example, AI could be used to alter
metadata to make any form of image/document look as if it was
created at the correct date, time, and geolocation of any incident.
On the horizon, we also need to be aware of the emerging imbalance
in the ability to use AI. Regulation to ensure the ethical and legal use
of AI by businesses is entirely appropriate to protect consumers. It’s
almost inevitable, whatever form it takes.
Conversely, our fraudster opponents can exploit ‘bad’ AI to its
maximum potential. We really must plan to counter the risk of being
outgunned by their adoption of AI capabilities.
Are there any immediate insurance fraud issues that
insurers should be addressing when it comes to AI threats?
Q
Insurance fraud linked to identity theft is an in-progress threat,
highlighting where fraudulent use of AI has the potential to
affect insurers even further.
A
Across the variety of experts that I’ve spoken with, there’s a consensus
that Gen AI will produce better quality phishing emails, automated at
scale and more convincing than our present-day equivalent. This can
easily lead to an increase in compromised and synthetic identity data.
From an insurance underwriting perspective, we know synthetic
identities and identity theft are already issues affecting book quality
through a raft of pre-meditated application fraud typologies, with
stolen credentials also being used to enable policy hijacking and
account takeovers.
Due to the likely downstream impact of Gen AI driving increased
consumer data compromise, insurer capability around identity
validation and verification across the customer, policy and claim
lifecycle is most certainly a priority.
Greater digital transformation has an increased risk
of fraud for businesses and organisations across the
Q insurance ecosystem. Is this consistent with what you are
seeing too?
A
Yes, and it also builds on the threats posed by ‘bad’ GenAI.
Having been at the heart of digital transformation within an
insurer organisation, I’m acutely aware of the risks that rapid
change presents, as well as the vast opportunities it affords.
Insurance companies want to speed up decisions, processing, and
customer interactions across the insurance lifecycle. Inevitably,
there will be vulnerabilities created which will be exploited if left
unaddressed. We have to accept that the digital channel will only
become more attractive to fraudsters as insurers place more customer
capability online, particularly in the form of sales, payments,
servicing, policy changes, refunds, FNOL and settlement information.
These risks can be mitigated by ensuring that counter-fraud thinking
and controls are included in an end-to-end transformation strategy.
Areas worth considering on an enterprise level include ensuring data
and events are captured and made available for decisions throughout
the customer lifecycle, identifying how fraud capabilities in sales,
servicing, and claims could be leveraged across these potential silos,
and ensuring a focus on people leadership as well as technology and
process changes.
What advice would you give to insurance companies
looking to improve their approach to managing fraud?
Q
A
We should be really proud of our sector’s increasingly mature
approach to fraud management. Our organisations have many
skilled experts and some excellent, ambitious teams. However,
I’d always encourage insurers to step back and take a full cross
enterprise and customer lifecycle view.
Our frontline leaders and their teams can sometimes get caught up
in coal-face, ‘business-as-usual’ operational activities, with very little
time to assess future opportunities as a consequence. These teams
must be supported and allowed the bandwidth to review strategy,
test new approaches or innovative technology, and learn from across
the business, peers, and other sectors.
Linked to this is ensuring an overall enterprise view. Many firms
already operate with a joined-up approach across all types of fraud,
whether through a centralised team or through a more federated (but
still coordinated) approach. Vulnerabilities arise in more legacy siloed
processes.
Firms fail to join up or leverage technologies and processes across
application, policy, and claim fraud. Critical areas like payments and
servicing are left unaddressed, and opportunities to reduce fraud are
missed.
This enterprise approach is even more critical at times of
transformation, where data architecture, orchestration, and the
ability to use data/intelligence assets across the end-to-end lifecycle
become crucial to achieving top performance.
About Whitelk
Whitelk is a specialist consultancy that
works with insurers, brokers, and MGAs
to improve counter-fraud capability and
reduce their total cost of fraud. It also
advises data/technology companies
and investors, such as private equity,
to understand the fraud market and
opportunities.
Matt Gilham,
Director, Whitelk
Fraud Supplement 21

Fraud Recovery Litigation:
A Powerful Tool in the
Fight Against Insurance Fraud
In most fraudulent claims, there are usually two key drivers - need and greed. But the economic uncertainty of
recent times has also driven opportunistic fraud, perpetrated by policyholders who once told us that they didn’t
need the money, but who, on reflection, should perhaps have been smart enough to know better.
Here are some recent examples which Crawford Legal
Services has helped to uncover.
A dentist pulling a fast one
Following a four-day trial in May 2023, and at the conclusion of over
two years of litigation, the court handed down judgment in relation
to a fraud recovery action. The case involved Dr X, a dentist who
was described by the court as ‘married to a GP, and at the time of
the alleged wrongdoing was of comfortable financial circumstances’.
He was found to have staged a road traffic accident and was held
liable for his fraudulent misrepresentation.
The road traffic accident was said to have occurred in April 2020. Dr
X, assisted by an associate who was both a mechanic and accident
management representative, cleverly used the COVID-19 lockdown
as an excuse to block his motor insurer’s attempts to inspect the
damaged vehicle. Calls to the insurer referred to the hard work
that Dr X was conducting for the NHS, including unpaid overtime.
This cynical plan worked, persuading the motor insurer to release
payment for £48K - the pre-accident value of the car. This payment
then triggered a secondary GAP claim, worth a further £31K if paid.
Crawford Legal Services was instructed to validate the GAP claim,
and the lies of Dr X quickly unravelled. The GAP claim was declined,
but Dr X refused to pay his motor insurer back, forcing a fraud
recovery action.
One line of defence offered by Dr X was his comfortable financial
position. Surely the court would not believe that a medical
professional and family man with an unblemished record would
be so stupid as to deliberately damage his car, risking his
reputation and career for £80K? Clearly, that argument was seen as
mouthwash – as we’ll see later.
Doctoring a claim
The dentist’s tale reminded me of another claim concerning an
NHS locum GP, Dr A, resident of a leafy Hampshire suburb. With no
known enemies, and in an apparently random attack, his BMW 750i
was subject to arson. Dr A, on the pretext of filming wildlife in his
garden, captured footage of an unknown male torching the BMW on
his own driveway. Despite attendance from the fire brigade, the car
was destroyed. Dr A’s motor insurer paid the claim without concern,
but the GAP insurer was less convinced. Although the fire was
presented as random and senseless, in the 46th month of a 4-year
GAP policy, Dr A had a number of reasons to profit from the alleged
total loss.
A detailed investigation led to the unchallenged decline of the
claim on the grounds that Dr A had orchestrated the deliberate
destruction of his own car. Dr A argued that he was earning so much
money from his role as a locum GP (plus rental income from three
properties) that he didn’t have a financial motive to engage in fraud.
In one sense he was right.
Things that go bump
At risk of repetition, Mr B - a motor and GAP policyholder from the
less leafy suburbs of Manchester - ran a similar (if bizarrely frank)
argument. Having parked his Audi S3 near his house as usual, a van
then hit the unattended car, causing significant damage. The motor
insurer paid without hesitation or concern. But for the GAP insurer,
this incident fell on the last day of the 4-year policy term. The claim
was declined, though Mr B claimed that he had no financial incentive
to make a fraudulent claim for ‘just’ £20K, as he was making so
much money from the growth and sale of cannabis…
Fraud Supplement 23

Tony Dixon
Head of Home Underwriting, Integra

An open and shutter case
In another recent case, Crawford UK was instructed to loss adjust
a commercial property claim made by a London based property
firm. Their East London shop/office premises, one of many in their
portfolio, suffered a significant and genuine fire. The work began in
order to return the property into its former state. The policyholder
had received over £120k, but then, arguing that they disagreed with
our contractor’s scope, asked for a further £30k to fund their own
repairs.
CFS was instructed to investigate, and it was found that the
policyholder had forged their supplier’s invoice to ‘hide’ a totally
new £10,000 steel roller shutter in the claim costs. Following this
discovery, the indemnity position was reversed, and no further
payments made. The policyholder issued proceedings, so CLS was
instructed to defend. The case culminated with the policyholder
repaying the entire claim and the policy being declared void. Now
the business will need to declare its dishonest conduct, and will
struggle to obtain property insurance cover going forward.
There’s no doubt that the economic uncertainty of recent times
has driven many policyholders to undertake desperate measures.
Insurers, across all lines, are reporting an increase in opportunistic
fraud.
But insurers should be alive to the possibility that insurance fraud is
now being driven by the greed and arrogance of policyholders, both
corporate and individual, who ought to know better.
For many years, the staple diet for fraud practitioners has been
cash-for-crash motor insurance fraud, invariably involving claimants
and policyholders with little stake in society, and little by way
of economic (or social) jeopardy associated with their conduct.
Stamping out insurance fraud within communities, or among
individuals with nothing to lose, can be frustrating for individual
insurers and the central industry bodies.
However, a combination of COVID-19 and economic downturn
has driven a new generation of insurance fraudster. Driven by
greed, by need, and sometimes both, Crawford Legal Services is
seeing middle class, well educated, property owning and otherwise
upstanding individuals engage in insurance fraud. Whilst this change
in the demographic of the insurance fraudster ought to seriously
alarm the insurance industry, such policyholders most certainly
have something to lose. Fraud recovery actions, through litigation if
necessary, represent a powerful tool in the fight against insurance
fraud.
It wasn’t necessary, however, to litigate against Mr & Mrs W,
household policyholders living in Kent. Their burglary, probably
genuine, included a claim for a stolen watch. Three years later, they
tried to sell the very same watch, leading to the discovery of this
classic insurance fraud. Mrs W (an insurance broker!) and Mr W
ought to have known better - Mr W felt it was ‘unfair’ that he should
have to repay the entire claim (after all, he told me, he had never
been dishonest in the past, expecting this to make his insurance
fraud somehow acceptable). However, after seeking further legal
advice, he quickly agreed to do so.
Dr X, where we started, chose a different route. After confessing
that the crash was fraudulent, he set about seeking to defend fraud
recovery proceedings by employing expensive commercial solicitors
to mount a campaign of aggressive tactical complaints and bitterly
fought litigation, including four days in court, represented by King’s
Counsel. Dr X now faces the prospect of repayment to his motor
insurer, an enormous costs bill, exemplary damages to be assessed,
committal proceedings for contempt of court, and professional
disciplinary action - which will almost certainly lead to professional
ruin. All this when, on his own evidence, he had no financial need to
do so.
In the past, insurers often viewed fraud recovery actions, probably
correctly, as ‘good money after bad’.
But the changing demographic of the insurance fraudster now
makes fraud recovery actions a powerful tool in the fight against
insurance fraud, and one that should be seriously considered.
Peter Oakes,
Head of Counter Fraud, Crawford & Company
Fraud Supplement 25

with
Paul Ridge,
Q&ASAS
We caught up with Paul Ridge,
Head of Insurance – UK at SAS, to
discuss the amplified risk of fraud
in light of increasing digitisation
across the industry, the pressures
that Fraud Investigation Teams
are facing at the moment,
and some key findings from
the recent Coalition Against
Insurance Fraud survey.
26 Fraud Supplement

Q
A
Let’s start by talking about the products and services offered
by SAS in relation to fighting fraud within the insurance
industry…
SAS has been a familiar fraud solution partner to insurers all
around the world for more than 15 years. Insurers’ data science
teams can use our AI and analytics platform to develop their own
fraud solutions, but we also offer complete detection and investigation
solutions that meet the needs of every persona, from the data scientist
to the fraud investigator, field agent and claims handler.
As a recognised leader in fraud, but also in digital experience solutions,
SAS are unique in being able to provide insurers with the ability to
drive greater collaboration across marketing, claims, digital experience
and fraud teams.
With increased digitisation across the industry, are insurers
making the landscape too easy for fraudsters?
Q
The challenge remains for any fraud detection strategy to
maintain the balance between protecting their business and
A delivering the services that their customers demand, all with as
little friction as possible. The continual development of digital services
and channels is inevitable, as these offer benefits to the insurer and
the current or prospective policyholder alike. While digital channels
may remove the opportunity to apply more traditional fraud detection
approaches and ‘human intuition’, innovative new solutions are also
available to protect insurers.
Insurers are continually evaluating new ways of detecting fraudulent
behaviours from data enrichment, applying scoring and profiling across
digital quote, customer management and claims journeys. That being
said, fraud teams aren’t always successful in securing the funding to
invest in these capabilities, as current market conditions influence
the prioritisation of growth in market share, cost reduction or loss
prevention.
Current trends in inflation and pricing will drive an increase in
opportunistic fraud alongside the more organised criminal activity.
This will be seen in quote manipulation (to try and rapidly drive down
increasing premiums) or claim exaggeration. These behavioural trends
are potentially exacerbated when dealing with a faceless digital
process; therefore, insurers need to continually apply techniques which
influence those behaviours, as they can be harder to detect.
Q
A
What other pressures are Fraud Investigations Teams under
at the moment, and how can the efficiency of their processes
be improved to alleviate this strain?
Insurance fraud detection and investigation teams operate in
a heavily regulated and highly competitive industry. Navigating
both of these constraints to successfully prevent fraud losses
can certainly be a challenge – constraints that organised criminals
needn’t worry about! For insurers, this creates a pressure to find
cost effective solutions that also comply with industry regulation on
data privacy, ethics, and transparency in AI-driven decision making.
Cross-organisation collaboration could be one way to alleviate these
pressures. By way of example, collaboration between Fraud teams and
Customer Experience or Marketing teams can lead to joint investment
strategies and cohesive customer strategies, neither of which can be
found when using solutions that only serve the purpose of one team.
To elaborate further on this point, let’s look at fraud detection in
digital customer journeys. In the case of customer acquisition,
insurers will have digital transformation, customer experience and
marketing leaders investing in marketing technology to develop
experiences that differentiate from those of the competition. Trends
here include increasing investment in technology vendors to capture
data from digital journeys, creating segmentation approaches and
then personalising the customer experience. We’ve also seen the rise
of ‘Customer Data Platform’ (CDP) providers, giving marketeers a place
to capture a wide range of data to help inform marketing strategies.
These ‘martech’ solutions can include the use of decision engines with
combinations of rules or scoring that take customers on prescribed
journeys, with the aim of maximising conversion from quote to
purchase.
Most often, Marketing and Customer Experience departments are
working in isolation to the Fraud teams, when in reality, there are many
reasons why they should be collaborating. Whether it be for customer
acquisition or ongoing customer management of the claims journey,
both sides of the coin can deliver more cost effective and cohesive
approaches. This may require stakeholders to consider technology
partners in new ways, meeting the needs of both fraud and marketing
functions, but also bringing data and decisions together to support
the goals of both sides. Instead, we see duplication of spend, friction
between leadership teams, and fragmentation that ultimately impacts
customer experience as well as the detection of fraud.
Tell me more about the key findings from the Coalition
Against Insurance Fraud survey…
Q
We have worked with the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud for
a number of years; we collaborate to review fraud technology
A trends in the US insurance industry. This study looks at the use
of technology across personal, commercial and other lines of business,
and can provide great insight into the rate of adoption. As an example,
we look to understand how insurers are applying anti-fraud tools, such
as automated alert generation, predictive modelling, reporting and
visualisation, case management, anomaly detection, and also advanced
network analytics.
What this study also gives us is an understanding of the barriers that
insurers are experiencing when looking to implement fraud solutions.
The most obvious challenges relate to the limited IT resource that
insurers have to support implementation (70% of responders) and the
quality of the data captured, alongside the speed with which this can
be accessed and integrated into any solution.
While this study looks at the US market, there are always similarities to
other markets - such as the UK. The insurance market is made up of a
wide range of product lines and portfolios, each with its own demands
and fraud risks. However, we can see that the use of analytics is on the
rise across almost all markets.
Q
Finally, is transparency and collaboration the best way
forward when it comes to sharing fraud intelligence and
assessing risk within the wider industry? What are the
arguments for and against this?
I absolutely believe it is, and this is continually proving to
be effective in any location. We have supported a number of
A insurance fraud consortiums around the world as they collaborate
cross-industry in the sharing of data. The Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB)
here in the UK have always been a great example for the rest of the
world in demonstrating how this can be effective. Our work with the
IFB explores new and innovative ways to advance this collaboration,
resulting in continued success for the IFB and its members.
The continued success for data sharing (and the consortiums that
support this) will require careful consideration of regulations around
data privacy, ethics, and how data is applied for fraud detection
purposes. This can relate to basic governance and quality controls
around the data they receive, to more complex topics such as the
emerging regulations of AI and the models and data they are trained
upon. The EU AI Act, alongside other regulation, will continue to develop
at pace to ensure that automated decisions and the data used by AI
is fair and free from bias. Everyone has a duty of care to ensure that
innocent customers do not experience any discrimination or harm in our
fight to stay one step ahead of the criminals who prey upon them.
Paul Ridge,
Head of Insurance - UK, SAS
Fraud Supplement 27

AI vs.
FRAUD
Fraud is a constantly
changing threat to the
insurance industry, with
a significant impact
on the bottom line,
customer satisfaction,
and society as a whole.
But does AI hold the
key to effectively
combatting fraud?
Insurance is ubiquitous in modern society,
and accounts for over 7% of the world’s
economic activity. The exact origins are
difficult to pinpoint, but we know that
insurance dates back to at least 1750 BC,
with the Babylonians and the Code of
Hammurabi. This code, consisting of 282 laws
carved onto a stone monument, established
standards for commercial interactions,
including some that related to the concept of
risk and insuring against it. While fraud isn’t
mentioned specifically, we can safely assume
that it has been present for as long as
insurance itself, and the two are inextricably
linked throughout history.
Today, technological advancements - coupled
with the post-pandemic cost-of-living
crisis - have caused people to turn to fraud
out of desperation as well as opportunism.
From opportunistic fraud to ghost-broking
and exaggerated claims, we’re seeing
familiar forms of fraud on the rise, not just
in insurance but across all industries. More
concerning still is the emergence of new
types of fraud - behaviours we haven’t seen
before that evade our current methods for
containment. According to a recent report
by PwC, 70% of companies surveyed say
that they have experienced new types of
fraud since COVID-19. Fraud is evolving and
spreading, and as it does, so too must our
measures for counteracting it.
How much is fraud costing
insurers, and what are they
doing about it?
According to the AFI, the UK alone could
be losing up to £219billion every year to
fraudsters, 72% of which is within the private
sector in industries like insurance. For any
insurer, paying out on fraudulent claims
doesn’t just damage the business financially;
it also affects the lives of individuals who
are either victims of fraud directly, or end up
having to pay higher premiums as the costs
are passed down.
Currently, insurers are using a range of
methods in their fraud detection efforts.
Most have a team of claims handlers that
manually assess a group of claims, looking
for the telltale signs of fraud. However,
relying entirely on an in-house team of
claims handlers makes scaling their work
challenging and costly. If you want to detect
more fraud, you’ll need to hire and train
more people. Also, you can’t avoid the fact
that human error will play a part, and every
fraudulent claim that gets past your team
affects your bottom line.
Insurers can address some of these
challenges by employing algorithms that are
programmed with rules to analyse huge sets
of claims, flagging those that fulfil specific
criteria for further investigation. However,
the accuracy of these algorithms is limited
28 Fraud Supplement

y the specific nature of the rules with which
they are programmed. Reprogramming these
algorithms with new rules for new fraud
types is a step in the right direction, but it is
both time-consuming and expensive.
Consequently, many insurers look to the
SaaS market for off-the-shelf fraud solutions.
But this kind of SaaS is typically expensive,
and whilst they sometimes perform initially,
the solutions providers are often slow to
update them as new types of fraud emerge.
In most cases, this requires you to pay
the provider to return and update their
solution themselves. This can take months
or years, and represents an added cost to
the business. The fact that the intellectual
property (IP) of the solution belongs to
the SaaS provider also means that any IP
advantage that one insurer might experience
when they discover something unique in
their sector gets eliminated, as it gets
shared equally by all their competitors
using the same solution. Since insurance
is so competitive, expensive off-the-shelf
SaaS products that don’t provide a business
advantage are impossible to justify.
yet it represents unforeseen and unplanned
capital expenditures that extend the amount
of time it takes for the solution to achieve its
expected ROI.
What insurers really need
Truly effective fraud detection requires a
single solution that combines the strengths
of all these approaches whilst mitigating
their weaknesses. Insurers need a solution
that integrates their unique business
operations and domain expertise with the
data-processing power of an algorithm,
but with the ability to learn new rules and
patterns from the data itself - rather than a
reliance on reprogramming.
They need a solution that is intuitive,
means-tested, and easy to use (like SaaS),
but one that is more agile and adaptable,
with the opportunity to retain IP to maintain
a competitive advantage. With this kind of
solution-specific AI, insurers can achieve
unprecedented levels of accuracy in a way
that augments the abilities of their teams,
detections of fraudulent claims by 120% and
increasing referrals retained by the fraud
department by 800%.
This definitively shows that, when adopted
effectively, the right AI solution can add
real and lasting value in the fraud detection
space. The key to the solution’s success
was the way it was customised to AND-
E’s specific requirements, enabling the
claims team to interact with it in order to
understand how and why recommendations
are made. Human-AI collaboration is a
fundamental aspect of real-world successful
AI adoption in insurance.
We cannot predict what new kinds of
insurance fraud might emerge in the coming
years. However, we do know that AI won’t
just play a pivotal role in combatting these
new fraud types; it will be integral to the
future of the insurance industry as a whole.
If insurers can successfully combine their
own teams’ experience and skillset with
AI’s unparalleled data-processing power,
Given the shortcomings of these
approaches, it’s no surprise that so many
insurers are turning to custom-built AI
solutions as a more effective means of
detecting and combatting fraud. AI’s
extraordinary capacity for ingesting,
processing, and identifying patterns and
anomalies within vast quantities of data
makes it uniquely suited for this purpose.
Today, insurers who don’t have the time or
resources to build their own in-house data
science teams are turning to consultancies
to unlock this value. But this comes with its
own complications. Even though machine
learning (ML) models represent a more
intelligent approach to detecting fraud,
these ML models are also susceptible to
changing patterns of human behaviour, often
suffering a significant decline in performance
over time. Studies have actually found that
91% of models decay within the first year,
post-deployment.
When that happens, the only way to bring
a model back to day-one performance is to
retrain it or rebuild it. Retraining requires
expertise that may not be available inhouse,
and consultants with the relevant
skill set will almost always recommend the
more expensive option, like rebuilding the
model with the latest techniques so that its
new operating performance is even better
than it was before. Since we all want the
best, this can be a convincing argument,
allowing AI to become reliable and trusted
partners in the process of detecting fraud.
An example of this can be seen in a solution
that Mind Foundry recently built for our
customer Aioi Nissay Dowa Europe (AND-E).
AND-E required a unique fraud detection
and prediction solution based on their
own specific requirements that no off-theshelf
solutions could meet. The end result
empowers AND-E’s claims experts to identify,
prioritise, and investigate fraudulent activity
by analysing a vast set of claims, alongside
ingesting over seven years of data - including
20 million unstructured documents - to
determine which ones showed signs of
potential fraud.
The most relevant claims get flagged and
prioritised in an investigations dashboard;
therefore, AND-E can resolve them in order
of the likelihood that they contain actual
instances of fraud. As new patterns emerge,
the solution automatically and continuously
integrates data back into the model using
a Continuous Metalearning capability -
improving performance and governing risks
over time, rather than decaying like so many
other machine learning models.
This has led to AND-E saving 2% on capped
indemnity spend in 2022. They are also on
track to double that in 2023, increasing the
then they will be able to unlock the best
outcomes for both their customers and their
business.
Selim brings close to 25 years of
experience delivering data, IT and
research-based solutions to the insurance
sector. Previously, Selim has worked at
Ingenie, LexisNexis, Experian, and AXA.
He’s an associate of
the Chartered
Insurance
Institute and has
worked with
industry bodies
like SepNet,
promoting STEM
subjects across
the UK.
Selim
Cavanagh,
Director of Insurance,
Mind Foundry
Fraud Supplement 29

Insurance
Providers
can be First
Responders
in the Fight
Against Fraud
Earlier this year, the UK Government launched their fraud strategy. This includes
the the ambition to reduce fraud by 10% by 2025 compared with fraud levels in
2019, as well as a new national fraud squad and the prioritisation of fraud within
the police force. Yet, as opportunistic insurance fraud grows amid the cost-of-living
crisis, insurance professionals cannot afford to wait. Career criminals, including ghost
brokers, continue to adapt and evolve to target any weaknesses in the system, while
opportunistic fraud is tempting for a population under financial strain.
However, balancing the scales between assessing risk
and excelling at customer service can be tricky. The vast
majority of insurance customers are honest with nothing to
hide; understandably, they will not welcome clunky fraud
checks that slow down service, nor will they appreciate
being tarred with the same brush as fraudsters. Instead,
insurance professionals seeking to stamp out fraud must
look for red flags without impacting the streamlined ‘quote
and buy’ experience the market has worked so hard to
deliver over the past few years.
This may not be as difficult as it sounds.
Is the customer new or known?
It starts with leveraging the customer data that the
insurance provider already holds, which will help to confirm
a person’s identity at a base level. With one source of
accurate, up to date and de-duplicated customer data
accessible throughout the customer journey, insurance
providers can use data enrichment more successfully to
flag the possible signs of fraud, signs that could be missed
through more basic checks. Of course, the benefits of
effective customer data management go well beyond fraud
detection to support all aspects of frictionless service
provision, from quote to claim.
The challenge is that while most insurance providers
have a wealth of information on their customers, more
often than not it can be fragmented and in organisational
silos. For example, a customer may have multiple policies
within different lines of business without the dots being
connected, or a recent merger or acquisition may even
present the challenge of customer data coming from two
different companies.
Consolidating data will help insurance providers to check
that the customer is who they say they are. In addition, as
the insurance industry becomes more person, rather than
policy, centric, it can help companies to deliver products
more suited to the needs of their policyholders.
Tackling this issue, linking and matching technology
is now being used by a growing number of insurance
providers to amalgamate all their data and ultimately build
Fraud Supplement 31

a single customer view. By compiling data from multiple
touchpoints - be that quote, renewal, claim or marketing
- previously disparate records are linked together using a
common identifier (such as LexID® for Insurance) to enable
a holistic, company-wide view of each customer.
Meanwhile, new YouGov findings published by the
Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB) show that as many as one in
four young adults would ‘likely’ consider an act of insurance
fraud if they were struggling financially. In light of this,
there is certainly an escalating need for insurance providers
to recognise quote manipulation.
Revealing the risk of quote manipulation
Types of quote manipulation vary widely, and may seem
innocuous to the policyholder. However, the deliberate
misstatement of key facts - for example, where a vehicle is
parked overnight - is illegal, and risks a policy being void at
claim. So, as more people may consider risking a ‘white lie’
on their insurance applications, insurance providers need to
ascertain the probability of this happening.
By connecting and comparing thousands of insurance
quotations from across the market, it is now possible
to uncover changes between quotes in key fields that
are prone to manipulation, helping to support insurance
providers in uncovering potential fraud. LexisNexis®
Quote Intelligence does just that, helping to spot possible
inaccuracies prior to policy inception.
The IFB’s latest public awareness campaign, Fraud
Cons, aims to educate consumers on the devastating
consequences that fraud can have on those tempted to
make fraudulent applications and claims. In the meantime,
LexisNexis Quote Intelligence can uncover fraud by helping
insurance providers to root out the problem themselves. In
doing so, this also helps to keep the cost of policies down
for the honest consumer.
Email intelligence flags links to fraud
The humble email address also features heavily in the
sector’s fight against fraud. It is one of the most common
components of an online transaction, not to mention a
unique identifier, so it makes perfect sense for insurance
providers to use this source to verify an individual’s
identity via the digital footprint that goes with it. By
assessing billions of transactions from global payment
processors, email fraud risk scoring solutions such as
LexisNexis® Emailage Rapid can gauge the risk associated
with a customer’s email address, as well as other personal
information provided during the application process.
Individuals are then accurately placed into Fraud Risk
Bands and issued with a predictive risk score. In this
way, email address intelligence has benefits for detecting
front-end insurance fraud such as ghost broking, while
speeding up the customer experience for those who are
automatically approved in real time.
Front-end fraud is not the only target for opportunistic
fraudsters. In 2022, the number of referrals for
opportunistic claims received by the City of London
Police’s Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department
increased by a staggering 82% from the previous year.
With this in mind, insurance providers would benefit from
gathering as much information as possible regarding an
individual’s past claims, which can help to inform the
potential scope for fraudulent activity.
Claims history uncovered for the individual
and the asset
That capability is almost here, with the launch of
LexisNexis® Precision Claims in early-2024. As a cuttingedge
market-wide contributory claims database, the new
contributory data solution will confirm past claims for both
the individual and the asset - including the value of the
claim and the settlement details - offering the market’s
very first view of home and motor claims in tandem. By
highlighting previously undisclosed claims, it will help to
support accurate risk assessment and assist the market in
their attempts to avoid fraud.
There is no silver bullet to beating fraud. The industry will
always require a need for collaboration and innovation,
with multi-pronged strategies to identify red flags at
every point of the insurance journey. As the ABI’s
Assistant Director, Head of Fraud and Financial Crime,
said: “While it is good to see the industry’s collaborative
efforts deliver results in 2022, there can be no room for
complacency. With many households and businesses
continuing to face rising costs, now more than ever honest
customers expect insurers to weed out the cheats and
focus on paying genuine claims as quickly as possible.”
It is clear that those insurance providers who exploit
data driven solutions to uncover fraud at source, all while
improving the customer experience, will stand the best
chance of keeping fraudsters at bay without compromising
valued relationships with honest customers.
1 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/118480/national-fraud-strategy.pdf
2 https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-articles/2023/8/crackdown-on-insurancecheats-delivering-results-but-average-scam-up-to-nearly-15000/
3 https://www.which.co.uk/news/article/the-most-common-types-of-insurancefraud-and-how-to-fight-your-corner-if-you-fall-victim-a6F0T5S0mYjY
4 https://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/news/city-of-london/news/2023/april/
ifed-shows-that-opportunistic-insurance-fraud-does-not-pay-as-cost-of-livingpressures-drive-surge-in-cases/
5 https://insurancefraudbureau.org/media-centre/ifb-news/2023/new-yougovfindings-show-growing-number-of-young-adults-tempted-by-insurance-fraud
6 https://insurancefraudbureau.org/fraud-cons
7 https://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/news/city-of-london/news/2023/april/
ifed-shows-that-opportunistic-insurance-fraud-does-not-pay-as-cost-of-livingpressures-drive-surge-in-cases/
8 https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-articles/2023/8/crackdown-on-insurancecheats-delivering-results-but-average-scam-up-to-nearly-15000/
Martyn Mathews,
VP personal and commercial lines,
UK and Ireland for LexisNexis Risk
Solutions, Insurance
Fraud Supplement 33

Charles Taylor:
‘An entire fraud ecosystem’
Modern Insurance Magazine catches up with Bobby Gracey, Global Head of
Counter Fraud at Charles Taylor, to discuss their inimitable blend of human skill
and automation, their widespread product offering, and their unique approach to
fraud investigation across multiple aspects of insurance.
QBobby, you are the Global Head of Counter Fraud at
Charles Taylor. What does that role entail?
ACharles Taylor provides insurance services, claims solutions
and technology platforms to the entire global insurance
market, supported by offices in over 30 different countries.
As Global Head of Counter Fraud, I head Charles Taylor’s Specialist
Investigation Services - a multi-product fraud investigation and
claims validation resource for our international businesses and
wider multi-sector insurers. We support all lines, including those not
traditionally associated with fraud, such as high net worth, marine,
aviation, trade credit, political risk, construction, and engineering.
My role helps ensure that Charles Taylor maintains and develops
its market leading response to countering insurance claims fraud
throughout our global operating locations. As a team, we work
directly with clients to mirror their strategic needs and fully
understand their specific tolerance to risk.
Integral to this is constantly developing Charles Taylor’s global
counter fraud capabilities; for example, with our recent acquisition
of Contego Investigative Services in the US. This provides our US
colleagues with direct access to over 350 licensed investigators,
supplying both field and surveillance services. We’ve also recently
enhanced our intelligence led approach by acquiring FraudKeeper,
an exciting new start-up tech from Argentina that enables Charles
Taylor to offer our own proprietary machine learning automated
fraud detection software to our clients.
Day-to-day, my role involves everything from overseeing our most
complex operational investigations, to supporting Charles Taylor’s
global business development and identifying new companies or
technologies suitable for acquisition. Daily, I draw on outstanding
talent within the Charles Taylor business, not least from our Director
of Investigation Services in the UK, Simon Cook. In addition, my
position as Chairman of the Chartered Institute of Loss Adjusters
(CILA) Anti-Fraud Committee enables me to bring a wider
perspective to the role.
After 35 years in insurance, I am as enthusiastic today as I was
all those years ago. During this time, the insurance industry has
made great strides in raising awareness of the cost and impact of
fraud on policyholders and shareholders alike. At Charles Taylor,
we’re continuing to innovate and collaborate to help eradicate this
longstanding issue.
QCharles Taylor Specialist Investigation Services are awardwinning
experts in multi sector fraud investigations. Tell
me more about this work!
AIn the last three years, the insurance industry has recognised
us for our operational investigation services, and for the
innovative counter fraud technologies that we’ve brought
to market. As mentioned earlier, Charles Taylor has pioneered fraud
investigation solutions for insurance lines that have not, historically,
been associated with fraud. Today, we describe ourselves as an entire
fraud ecosystem.
Amongst our innovative counter fraud technologies is ‘Discovery,
by Charles Taylor’. Available in numerous global locations, both in
English and Spanish, Discovery has truly disrupted the sector by
enabling ethical and legal data gathering from over 200 social media
and open-source sites worldwide. Its unique technology reviews
unstructured content to gather impactful data; helping claims
professionals and investigators to make better decisions when it
comes to identifying fraud or validating claims.
Discovery also delivers outstanding cost and process efficiencies,
converting around 30 hours of manual investigation time into a
30-minute interactive process. Investigators can therefore spend
34 Fraud Supplement

more time on impactful, rather than routine, tasks. Discovery is also
highly scalable and can process around 10,000 reports per month, a
far cry from manual searches.
Meanwhile, our automated fraud detection software, FraudKeeper,
has been successfully deployed across South America, and we’re also
focused on leveraging this technology further in European and North
American markets. This will help to better detect fraud, understand
fraud trends, and future-proof fraud prevention.
Last but not least, by acquiring US-based Contego Investigative
Services, we’re meeting growing counter fraud needs in the USA,
onboarding hundreds of US investigators and enabling these US
services to grow significantly under our ownership.
QSo, give me some examples of what your toolkit of
investigation products consists of!
AOur counter fraud toolkit is all inclusive. It ranges from
intelligence led background checks and automated
fraud detection software, to social media reviews, field
investigation and surveillance services.
Probably one of our best kept secrets is the scale of our international
investigation capabilities. This area of our investigation toolkit has
been developed over the last 15 years, with Charles Taylor Assistance
evolving to become the recognised market leader in global travel
claims management.
In developing our toolkit, we recognise that return on investment
is fundamental to clients. We know that the key to all investigative
solutions is to constantly review performance versus operating costs
and market requirements. We also appreciate that no two insurers
have the same fraud philosophy, or even tolerance to risk.
Our proactive approach means we’re always on the lookout for new,
innovative technologies and operational solutions to help identify
and combat claims fraud for our customers.
QHow does your strategic operational response utilise
technology?
AAt Charles Taylor, we endeavour to be intelligence led in our
decision-making and processes. That being said, we firmly
believe that harnessing our existing human capital of ‘IQ’ is
the best strategic approach, juxtaposed with our ‘IT’. One cannot fully
perform without the other, and this blended approach ensures that
our clients benefit from the best of both worlds.
By adding our automated fraud detection software (FraudKeeper),
and our open source and social media digital intelligence tool
(Discovery) to our portfolio of counter fraud services, we’ve
successfully harnessed technology that complements our human
skills. Importantly, because we own this technology ourselves, we can
be nimble in its deployment - avoiding delays caused by third parties
changing algorithms or updating software.
When it comes to AI, the current industry debate on benefits vs.
disadvantages remains interesting.
AI is an area that all industry
leaders need to better understand
and consider, but it’s clear that
it can be utilised by fraudsters
and crime fighters alike. So, the
onus is on the insurance industry
to develop AI strategies that
are several steps ahead of both
organised and opportunistic
fraudsters. Above all, the counter
fraud sector can never stand still.
Reach out to Bobby via email
for more information:
bobby.gracey@charlestaylor.com
Fraud Supplement 35

Navigating the complexities of
Insurance Fraud in the UK
and Unmasking Current Trends
Insurance offers
protection and peace
of mind to millions
of individuals and
businesses. However,
the insurance
landscape in the
UK is not without its
challenges, one of the
most significant being
motor insurance fraud.
As insurance
investigators, we’re
always on the lookout
for fraud and are all too
aware of the known
trends, including staged
and contrived collisions
as well as suspicious
single-vehicle claims.
But more recent trends,
such as ghost broking
and cash-for-crash
scams involving moped
riders, are now plaguing
the industry as newer
types of fraud evolve.
The Cost of
Insurance Fraud
Before delving into specifics, it’s important
to understand the impact that insurance
fraud can have on the UK economy and its
citizens. Estimates put the annual cost of
fraud in the UK in the billions of pounds. This
financial burden is ultimately borne by honest
policyholders, who see their premiums rise
due to fraudulent claim costs.
Understanding the motivation behind
insurance fraud is crucial. Individuals and
organised crime groups (OCGs) engage
in fraudulent activities for various reasons,
including financial gain, perceived opportunity,
or desperation. Trends in UK insurance fraud
continue to evolve. Most are a variation on
a theme that we’ve seen many times over
the years; however, some recent trends
are concerning with regards to the level of
organisation, as well as the potential impact
on innocent members of the public.
Ghost Broking
Ghost Broking is a term coined for a scam
whereby the broker appears to be genuine,
but proves extremely difficult to pin down
to a specific location. Typically, fraudulent
individuals pose as legitimate insurance
brokers or agents, targeting vulnerable
motorists in search of affordable coverage.
These ‘Ghost Brokers’ operate at the
intersection of deception and exploitation,
often preying on young members of society,
on immigrant communities as well as
inexperienced drivers who are more likely
to fall victim to their ‘too good to be true’
schemes. They claim to offer insurance
policies at unbelievably low rates to
entice unsuspecting victims, often forging
addresses, contact details and insurance
certificates, with all the obvious outcomes.
Victims unwittingly pay for these fraudulent
policies, all too often believing that they
are adequately insured when they are not.
Oftentimes, this deception is only discovered
when a road traffic collision occurs and
an insurance claim is instigated, the
consequences of which can be dire.
DLB Investigations have further concerns
around a new and developing trend, where
the details of a genuine individual or company
are cloned. Those details are then used to
incept a false fleet policy in order to ‘insure’
voluminous numbers of genuine vehicles.
Links to large-scale OCGs are common here,
and our investigations have revealed that the
genuine entity is invariably unaware of the
policy, or the vehicles covered by it.
An alarm bell often sounds when the victim
is notified of insurance claims, or receives
numerous penalty notices for vehicles they
know nothing about. Unfortunately, these
claims and fines are attributable to the
innocent victim because their details are
obtained from the MID database.
Crash for Cash
These scams, associated with deliberate
rear-end induced crashes, are well-publicised
and have been around for some time. But this
has now morphed into a worrying new trend
involving moped riders, who ‘crash’ head-on
into an unsuspecting motorist driving a car
or van.
We’ve seen this dangerous new development
explode over the past two years into
something akin to an epidemic. Criminals
intentionally causing accidents is nothing
new, but appearing to ride headfirst into
an unsuspecting motorist certainly is! The
motivation behind these scams is clear:
financial gain through fraudulent insurance
claims.
Our recent investigations at DLB have
uncovered many such claims. Through
collaboration with other agencies, we’ve been
instrumental in gathering key intelligence
and evidence to identify how the scam
works, as well as who is likely to be behind it.
36 Fraud Supplement

Fraudsters are not easily deterred, and yet
despite collective efforts, the scam continues
apace.
Fraudsters frequently feign injuries (no real
injury is ever suffered) for maximum gain,
as well as exaggerated vehicle damage
to ensure that a replacement moped is
supplied, frequently via inflated credit hire
schemes. Often, fake witnesses are also
provided, adding a degree of faux legitimacy
to the claim.
All of this adds further cost-layering to
the claim that is presented to an innocent
motorist’s insurance company. Contesting
such a claim can be difficult for insurers,
not to mention potentially intimidating for
policyholders. Insightful intelligence from an
experienced investigations company can
often be central to a successful outcome.
Combatting Insurance Fraud in
the UK
The fight against insurance fraud in the
UK is a multifaceted battle, one that
involves cooperation among insurers,
suppliers, enforcement agencies and other
stakeholders alike. Numerous strategies can
be employed to detect and prevent fraudulent
activities.
Insurance companies are increasingly
harnessing the power of data analytics to
identify suspicious patterns and anomalies
in motor claims data. Deploying the right
technology allows investigators to quickly
triage claims, highlighting potentially
fraudulent ones for further investigation.
As a progressive and forward-thinking
company, DLB Investigations constantly
challenge the status quo and look for
innovative investigative solutions. For
example, our Rapid Triage of Claims (RTC)
service aims to shift the investigative process
as close to FNOL as possible, in order to
gather fresh, timely and meaningful evidence.
At the other end of the claims investigation
process is Helix, our forensic vehicle data
service. Helix extracts and analyses data
stored in modern vehicles, and invariably
delivers irrefutable evidence to validate or
reject a claim.
However, no one should rely on technology
alone; software can only do so much! That’s
where human interaction via specialists, such
as investigation companies, plays a crucial
role in showing the policyholders that their
insurer is not just a faceless entity.
From our own experiences at DLB, the mere
mention of a professional investigator coming
to visit a policyholder can be enough to make
a would-be fraudster think twice about their
actions, or even withdraw a spurious claim.
In Conclusion…
The landscape of insurance fraud in the
United Kingdom is complex and continually
evolving. It’s a financial and social concern
that demands immediate attention and action.
Technology can help. Specialist investigators
can also help. The right combination of both
can prove pivotal.
One proven way to deter fraudsters is for
insurance companies to be seen to be
investigating claims diligently to uncover
fraud. As investigations specialists, we can
show how human and tech resources already
save some UK insurance companies millions
of pounds every year by providing data
that lets them repudiate fraudulent claims. I
believe that others should follow – not simply
to save money, but also to highlight our
diligence to criminals who play the system.
They won’t succeed, and will be brought
to book. At DLB, we know how to help the
system bite back.
David Booker,
Managing Director, DLB Investigations Ltd
Fraud Supplement 37

How can the insurance
industry manage the internal
risk of fraud?
An insurance policy is one of those strange purchases, something that we buy but never plan to use. If the worst does
happen however, we expect the voice on the other end of the phone to be somebody that we can trust in our hour of
need, somebody that will help us to navigate the complexity of our claim. We wouldn’t think for a moment that they
may use us as a way to obtain an unlawful benefit for themselves.
Last year, cases filed to the Cifas Internal Fraud Database
rose by nearly 10% when compared to the previous year,
with around 40% of these cases filed for employees stealing
information, money and equipment.
Employees within the insurance sector are no different to any
other sector when it comes to dishonest conduct. They have
a variety of information available at their fingertips, and can
identify potential loopholes to exploit for their own gain. It isn’t
as obvious as diverting claims money to their own accounts;
there are those that are willing to sell confidential information
as to get away with making false claims. In addition, there are
employees willing to sell the data of claimant policy holders
to third parties in order to pursue legal action on behalf of a
potentially injured individual, not to mention those taking a cut
from a payout in exchange for processing a fraudulent claim.
Now more than ever, organisations need to ensure that they
have defences in place to protect against the insider threat.
External factors have never been greater, with large numbers
of employees working from home and hybrid working as
we face the second winter of a cost-of-living crisis. If we are
pushed enough, I believe that all of us have the inclination to
be dishonest. Thankfully, most of us will never hit that point,
but those that do may find themselves motivated to commit
fraudulent conduct in an attempt to keep their head above
water. Faced with this circumstance, many rationalise their
behaviour by convincing themselves that they should have
received a pay increase or a bonus, or they are taking on more
responsibilities as companies struggle to find the budget to
replace colleagues that have been made redundant or left. A
lack of investment in technology or a reduction in employee
numbers can also leave gaps, which enables employees to
commit fraud against their employer.
Collaboration is key to organisations when it comes to fighting
the insider threat. Organisations must create an opportunity to
talk about the threats and fraud trends that they are facing, as
well as confirming the integrity of potential candidates who are
applying for roles alongside that of existing employees.
In 2022, 42% of cases filed to our Internal Fraud Database
involved false employment applications – up by nearly a
quarter from the previous year.
Cases of this type are increasingly using ‘reference houses’
when applying for new roles, meaning that previous
employments can effectively be hidden as a result of the
applicant paying for a false reference. Many of these
‘reference houses’ offer an additional service whereby they will
impersonate a candidate’s previous employer to give them a
positive reference over the phone.
Cifas Insider Threat Protect is the only solution in the UK that
helps organisations to identify and stop dishonest conduct by
job applicants and employees within the workplace.
Through cutting-edge
data, intelligence and
learning, Insider Threat
Protect is the complete
solution to helping
businesses prevent,
detect, and defend
against internal fraud, as
well as other security risks
that frequently originate
within an organisation.
linkedin.com/
company/cifasuk
twitter.com/
CifasUK
38 Fraud Supplement

Specialist
Investigation
Services
Innovative solutions
to help validate claims &
combat insurance fraud
Charles Taylor Specialist Investigation Services (CTSIS) works
collaboratively with the insurance industry to provide market
leading global claims validation and counter fraud services.
Our full suite of claims validation solutions includes
Fraud Keeper, our proprietary Automated Fraud
Detection software, our multi award winning social
media and open source intelligence tool, Discovery by
Charles Taylor, both of which are supported by internal
and external counter fraud professionals.
GET IN TOUCH
Bobby Gracey
Group Head of Fraud
Find out more
+44 7557 774 577
bobby.gracey@charlestaylor.com
Simon Cook
Director of Investigation Services – UK
+44 7834 098 648
simon.cook@charlestaylor.com

www.insurancecxawards.com
Awards Ceremony 07.02.24
Proud Embankment, London
Sponsorship Enquiries: rachael.pearson@charltongrant.co.uk
Event Enquiries: millie@charltongrant.co.uk
Kindly sponsored by