Just about everybody doing the business? Explaining ‘cash-for-crash’ insurance fraud in the United Kingdom
| Author | Mark Button,Azeem Aleem,Graham Brooks,Chris Lewis |
| DOI | 10.1177/0004865816638910 |
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Australian & New Zealand
Journal of Criminology
2017, Vol. 50(2) 176–194
!The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0004865816638910
journals.sagepub.com/home/anj
Article
Just about everybody doing
the business? Explaining
‘cash-for-crash’ insurance
fraud in the United Kingdom
Mark Button
University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK
Graham Brooks
University of Wolverhampton, Wulfruna Street, Wolverhampton, UK
Chris Lewis
University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK
Azeem Aleem
RSA, UK
Abstract
There is much international research on the different types of fraud committed by individuals
and/or organised crime. There is, however, limited research on insurance fraud and a par-
ticular species of such fraud which has become known as ‘cash-for-crash’ fraud in the United
Kingdom. In addition, there are very few published studies of fraudsters which actually draw
upon interviews with them. This article bridges both of these gaps providing a focus upon
‘cash-for-crash’ fraudsters which is based upon empirical research drawn from six interviews
with such offenders and a database of over 400 offenders built upon successful prosecutions
of such cases in the United Kingdom. This article offers a profile of such offenders and
presents insights into why and how some people might become involved in ‘cash-for-crash’
type frauds.
Keywords
Insurance fraud, ‘cash-for-crash’, offenders, motivation, profile
Introduction
In October 2015, the Sydney Morning Herald highlighted the case of a heavily pregnant
woman who staged a motor accident to secure an insurance payment. In the same article,
Corresponding author:
Mark Button, Centre for Counter Fraud Studies, University of Portsmouth, 141 High St, Portsmouth PO1 2HY, UK.
Email: mark.button@port.ac.uk
the main trade body for insurers in Australia, the Insurance Council of Australia, was
quoted as saying, ‘that networks of professional criminals had become ‘‘highly active’’ in
the ‘‘claims farming’’ practice because it facilitates numerous payouts across multiple
insurers’ (Duff, 2015). Insurance fraud and the involvement of a wide range of actors
committing fraud, from lone opportunists to organised criminals, has been noted as a
problem by several authors writing on Australia (e.g. Baldock, 1997; Hayes & Prenzler,
2003; Smith, 2014). There is also evidence of automobile based insurance frauds regu-
larly occurring in the USA, particularly in the states of New York, California, Florida,
Massachusetts; as well as Canada (Coalition Against Insurance Fraud, n.d.; Ontario
Automobile Insurance Anti-Fraud Task Force, 2012). In the United Kingdom (UK),
over the last 10 years the type of fraud highlighted by the Sydney Morning Herald,
which has been dubbed ‘cash-for-crash’ fraud, has grown to national prominence solicit-
ing a wide range of government and industry initiatives to address it (Button and
Brooks, 2016). This article explores ‘cash-for-crash’ fraud in the UK by providing a
profile of the offenders who have been successfully prosecuted and then based upon
interviews with six of those who have been involved, offer insights on their motives
for becoming involved. It will highlight the wide strata of society involved, from ‘ordin-
ary’ citizens to large organised criminal networks. The article starts with an examination
of the types of ‘cash-for-crash’ fraud, before setting out the methodology for this
research. The article then examines the profile of those convicted for this type of
crime, before examining some of the findings from the interviews which explain why
people become involved in such crimes.
Insurance fraud
There is a significant body of research that shows the willingness of ‘ordinary’ people to
accept and engage in different types of insurance fraud in UK and other countries
(Association of British Insurers, 2003; Buttler, 2013; Button, Pakes, & Blackbourn, in
press; Dodd, 1998; Gill, Woolley, & Gill, 1994; Hayes & Prenzler, 2003; Karstedt &
Farrall, 2006; Tennyson, 2002). There is also research illustrating the widespread
involvement of the middle classes in the broad concept of white collar crime, into
which much of fraud falls (Weisburd, Wheeler, Waring, & Bode, 1991; Weisburd &
Waring, 2001). There have, however, only been a limited number of studies on fraudsters
in comparison to other criminals in the UK (Gill, 2005a; Gill & Randall, 2015;
Goldstraw-White, 2011; Levi, 1998; Treadwell, 2011). Most have tended to focus
upon relatively small scale samples in specific areas of fraud, seeking to understand
their modus operandi and reasons for doing it. For example Levi’s (1998) study of
plastic card fraud, Cressey (1953), Gill (2005b) and Goldstraw-White’s (2011) investiga-
tion of occupational fraudsters, Shover et al’s (2003) research on telephone fraudsters
and Dean and Melrose’s (1997) interviews with benefits fraudsters.
Insurance fraud, if the industry statistics are accepted, is a major problem, costing the
UK sector over £1 billion per year (Association of British Insurers, 2012). ‘Cash-for-
crash’ fraud forms a significant part of this loss at £392 million per annum (Insurance
Fraud Bureau, 2013). There has, however, been limited research on this type of fraud in
the UK (Clarke, 1989, 1990; Dobie, 2012; Doig, Jones, & Wait, 1999; Gill et al., 1994;
Litton, 2000; Morley, Ball, & Ormerod, 2006; Palasinski, 2009; Smith, Button, Johnston,
Button et al. 177
To continue reading
Request your trial